[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m17ibtgxj8.fsf@frodo.ebiederm.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 15:54:51 -0700
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>, mingo@...e.hu,
hpa@...or.com, tglx@...utronix.de, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
andi@...stfloor.org, jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org, steiner@....com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 00/26] x64, x2apic/intr-remap: Interrupt-remapping and x2apic support
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com> writes:
> in general the purpose of this is to support 256 and more logical threads....
> .... not going to happen on 32 bit
Huh?
Intel is still making new 32bit processors with otherwise modern chipsets
like tolapai so I don't plan to count anything out. Especially things like
the iommu support for irqs may be interesting. Further the iommu irq
support is interesting to hypervisors so I would not at all be surprised
to see the code getting reused in that context, and with 32bit kernels.
I'm not asking for anyone to unify code they are not touching but
rather to code things so unification because trivial. The entire
purpose of having arch/x86. We have had this discussion and the
viewpoint that we won't add new hardware features to x86_32 and just
put it in maintenance mode lost, because the hardware manufactures
include Intel have not put x86_32 into strictly maintenance mode.
Eric
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists