[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A2E7B40.4070608@zytor.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2009 08:09:52 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [benchmark] 1% performance overhead of paravirt_ops on native
kernels
Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> OTOH, highmem is clearly a useful hardware enablement feature with a
> slowly receding upside and a constant downside. The outcome is
> clear: when a critical threshold is reached distros will stop
> enabling it. (or more likely, there will be pure 64-bit x86 distros)
>
A major problem is that distros don't seem to be willing to push 64-bit
kernels for 32-bit distros. There are a number of good (and
not-so-good) reasons why users may want to run a 32-bit userspace, but
not running a 64-bit kernel on capable hardware is just problematic.
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
--
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