From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750796AbWAaNCg (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jan 2006 08:02:36 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750797AbWAaNCg (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jan 2006 08:02:36 -0500 Received: from ms-smtp-02.nyroc.rr.com ([24.24.2.56]:34812 "EHLO ms-smtp-02.nyroc.rr.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750796AbWAaNCg (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jan 2006 08:02:36 -0500 Subject: Re: i386 requires x86_64? From: Steven Rostedt To: "Randy.Dunlap" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "L. A. Walsh" In-Reply-To: <20060130193129.19f04e6f.rdunlap@xenotime.net> References: <43DED532.5060407@tlinx.org> <20060130193129.19f04e6f.rdunlap@xenotime.net> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 08:02:14 -0500 Message-Id: <1138712535.7088.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 19:31 -0800, Randy.Dunlap wrote: > > Yes, there are bits in i386 that use x86_64 and there are > bits in x86_64 that use i386 code, so that the source code > won't have to be duplicated. Perhaps we need an arch/x86_common that has this code. Not just to help those that like to delete other archs, but also to make it easier for us that might modify the code and know that this code is shared. It's better design to have a arch/x86_common that is compiled with i386 and x86_64 than to have code with - #include "../../x86_64/kernel/blah.c" - in it. -- Steve