From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030259AbWBAC4J (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jan 2006 21:56:09 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030255AbWBAC4J (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jan 2006 21:56:09 -0500 Received: from ishtar.tlinx.org ([64.81.245.74]:26044 "EHLO ishtar.tlinx.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030259AbWBAC4I (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jan 2006 21:56:08 -0500 Message-ID: <43E02340.2020406@tlinx.org> Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 18:56:00 -0800 From: "L. A. Walsh" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (Windows/20051201) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Steven Rostedt CC: "Randy.Dunlap" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: i386 requires x86_64? References: <43DED532.5060407@tlinx.org> <20060130193129.19f04e6f.rdunlap@xenotime.net> <1138712535.7088.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <1138712535.7088.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Steven Rostedt wrote: > 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. > > I'd tend to agree (unless it is a big problem). It seems an unsound design principle to manually be including code via direct references to a different architecture tree. Linda