Messages in this thread |  | | From | davej@suse ... | Date | Wed, 8 Nov 2000 15:10:17 +0000 (GMT) | Subject | Re: Installing kernel 2.4 |
| |
On Wed, 8 Nov 2000 Bruce_Holzrichter@infinium.com wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 08, 2000 at 03:25:56AM +0000, davej@suse.de wrote: > > > On Tue, 7 Nov 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote: > > > > If the compiler always aligned all functions and data on 16 byte > > > > boundries (NetWare) for all i386 code, it would run a lot faster. > > > > > > Except on architectures where 16 byte alignment isn't optimal. > > > > > > > Cache line alignment could be an option in the loader .... after all, > > > > it's hte loader that locates data in memory. If Linux were PE based, > > > > relocation logic would be a snap with this model (like NT). > > > > > > Are you suggesting multiple files of differing alignments packed into > > > a single kernel image, and have the loader select the correct one at > > > runtime ? I really hope I've misinterpreted your intention. > > > > Or more practically, a smart loader than could select a kernel image > > based on arch and auto-detect to load the correct image. I don't really > > think it matters much what mechanism is used. > > > > What makes more sense is to pack multiple segments for different > > processor architecures into a single executable package, and have the > > loader pick the right one (the NT model). It could be used for > > SMP and non-SMP images, though, as well as i386, i586, i686, etc.
> And this would fit on my 1.4bm floppy so I can boot my hard driveless > firewalling system, correct?
Your mailer is misattributing people. I didn't say that, my comments were the ones you've attributed to Jeff.
regards,
davej.
-- | Dave Jones <davej@suse.de> http://www.suse.de/~davej | SuSE Labs
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |