[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: standard runtime for (possible/hopeful) 64bit kernels
>>>>> "Toru" == Toru Nishimura <locore64%alkyltechnology.com@localhost> writes:
>> That sounds right. N64 is the harder job because you have to fix
>> all the code that assumes sizeof(void *) == sizeof(int),
Toru> I'd say correct NetBSD apps do not have such the evil
Toru> assumption since the day when NetBSD/alpha was roled out to
Toru> public ...
That may be, but not all apps are correct in this respect...
>> Given that lots of embedded apps make little use of the FPU (even
>> if there is one), I like O64 because it's much less work.
Toru> Um I hesitate to say in this way, it's a matter for how to
Toru> reduce porting burden of incorrectly written SW from 32bit
Toru> world, isn't it?
No. O64 and N32 are identical as far as the pointer vs. integer size
issue I mentioned -- in both cases, sizeof(int) == sizeof (long) ==
sizeof (void *). Only N64 (and O64 with -mlong64) have the 64 bit
long and pointer.
By "less work" I meant a lot fewer files in the NetBSD code base to
change. O64 touches only a fraction of the assembly language files,
while N32 or N64 touches most of them.
Main Index |
Thread Index |