Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 1 Jun 1998 11:54:48 +0100 | From | Jamie Lokier <> | Subject | Compatible with i386/UP but optimised for i686/SMP [was Re: test_and_set_bit() not atomic forever?] |
| |
On Mon, Jun 01, 1998 at 09:27:00AM +0100, Philip Blundell wrote: > >The point was that lots of people are running SMP kernels on UP machines, > >where it's gratuitous overhead. > > Then they shouldn't do that.
Unless they're a distributor who wants to run one kernel per architecture, + modules.
Or a sysadmin, in a situation where managing different kernels for that extra bit of efficiency isn't worth the administrative overhead.
These points apply also to the i386/i486/i586/i686 optimisation issue. Is it worth making a kernel nearly optimised for i686 but compatible with i386? (Perhaps using fixups in the same way to blank out calls to do the "verify put_user" type stuff, vs. blanking out flush_tlb and so forth?)
-- Jamie
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
| |