Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Tue, 31 Jan 2006 18:56:00 -0800 | | From | "L. A. Walsh" <> | | Subject | Re: i386 requires x86_64? |
| |
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
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |