x86-32 is clumsy though. "Original name that stuck" is perfectly legitimate, and having multiple names for the same thing is always worse then having slightly imperfect names. On June 19, 2015 12:13:05 AM PDT, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >* H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> We have generally used i386 as opposed to x86 for that purpose. [...] > >So 'i386' is really the original name that stuck. > >'x86-32' sounds more appropriate to me - we should not perpetuate the >i386 name, >as we don't run on an original i386 anymore ;-) > >Here's what I think sounds pretty natural: > > CONFIG_X86_32_ABI > CONFIG_X86_64_ABI > CONFIG_X86_X32_ABI > >- CONFIG_X86_X32_ABI and CONFIG_X86_32_ABI selects CONFIG_COMPAT. >- CONFIG_X86_32_ABI enables the 32-bit/32-bit system call ABI. >- CONFIG_X86_X32_ABI enables the extra 64-bit/32-bit system call >entries. >- CONFIG_IA32_EMULATION goes away. > >> [...] IA32 in MSR names is part of the MSR name and should not be >taken out. > >Yes, of course. > >Thanks, > > Ingo -- Sent from my mobile phone. Please pardon brevity and lack of formatting. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tip-commits" in
|