View Single Post
Old 03-01-04, 07:20 PM   #10
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 154

Originally posted by shupienis
But isn't the upcoming Intel XEON-64 supposed to use a completely different instruction code from the AMD46? I would suspect that they would also have incompatible pinouts, requiring different sockets and support chipsets, as well.

Back to the kernel, you raise a key issue. Developers vs. Users.

The good developer wants to make clean, compact code, no matter how long it takes -- even if it means "never".

The user wants it NOW, regardless of how big, ugly and kludgy it is. Mr Gates owes his billions to realizing that, and acting appropriately on it.

I would presume that best practice lies somewhere in between the two conflicting mindsets.

For my part, I'd be perfectly fat, dumb and happy compiling some huge blob of code into my kernel. It's already 6+ meg -- what's a few more meg going to hurt? You see, for ME (I don't speak for anyone else), for ME, compiling a large piece of code into MY kernel IS viable. For me. Not necessarily for anyone else. Even if it makes my dog go bald and the neighbor's cat start singing opera.

As I recall from a few years ago, space in the Linux Kernel is precious because it has to fit on a floppy (or was that overcome several versions ago?), but BSD has no such limitation that I am aware of.

Here's an interesting thought/question... OS-X for the Mac G5. The G5 is a 64-bit extension to a 32-bit architecture, just like the current AMD64 and the proposed future Intel Xeon-64. OS-X is a BSD kernel. What's the 64-bit driver status there?

Warmest regards!
// Joe
There is no Xeon 64 so i have no clue what you are talking about...

Perhaps you mean the Itanium? it has been out for five years, the IA64-II is probably what you mean, this is not a processor for even the mainstream generation of servers, it is EXPENSIVE and from what i have seen performs pretty badly unless you restructure every single line of code, Intel does not have the authority to make companies do that anymore...

Or perhaps you mean the Ia32-e? The cpu that implemented some of the parts of the AM-64 arch but forgot the most important part?

There are kernels for AM-64 for all versions of linux and BSD that are stable...

It would be an interesting question if it wasn't for the fact that the G5 uses a 32bit interpreter to execute the code, the Intel Xeon-64 will never exist and the AMD64 have had it's own kernel for BSD for months...

Regarding the linux kernel, that is a warning you get if your kernel exceeds 1.44 mb (in 2.4 kernels, in 2.5 and later you will not even get the warning) that was it... so, wrong on that too...

So you have absolutely no clue about any of this, i suggest you read before you write...
SnapIT is offline   Reply With Quote