On Thu, 2007-03-08 at 14:17 -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote: > I think that this is not actually an option since > powerpc64 is all 32-bit userspace. > Maybe some other arch-es are like this also (?). I think all other architectures except x86_64 and maybe ia64 would prefer to stay 32-bit for performance reasons alone. As for x86_64 and ia64, there is another incentive, namely compatibility with x86, which matters if proprietary software is involved. Finally, using 32-bit userspace could cut memory consumption, which is important for some uses. Switching 32-bit systems to a 64-bit kernel shouldn't be a big deal. It should be transparent, just like enabling an option to support 4 gigabytes of memory or 64-bit PCI resources. 32-bit distributions should have an option to install a 64-bit kernel, just like it's possible to install a kernel optimized for 586 CPU. A Live CD could benefit from 64-bit kernel because it would allow users to chroot to their 64-bit distro installation and repair it, without having to provide 64-bit userspace on the CD. I think the reason 32-bit userspace on 64-bit kernel is not widespread is precisely because of such incompatibilities as the one we are discussing. The need for proper support will grow as laptops with over 1 gigabyte of memory become a commonplace. I believe breaking the "u32/k64" compatibility is not an option. I would prefer the option two, the changeover. I don't think wireless extensions (or at least the compatible kernel API) should go away soon. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
