Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 24 Feb 2004 20:40:33 -0600 (CST)
From:      James Van Artsdalen <james-freebsd-amd64@jrv.org>
To:        don@sandvine.com
Cc:        freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: x86-64
Message-ID:  <200402250240.i1P2eXtV070993@bigtex.jrv.org>
In-Reply-To: <FE045D4D9F7AED4CBFF1B3B813C85337045D8249@mail.sandvine.com> (message from Don Bowman on Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:39:35 -0500)
References:  <FE045D4D9F7AED4CBFF1B3B813C85337045D8249@mail.sandvine.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> From: Don Bowman <don@sandvine.com>
> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:39:35 -0500
> 
> Has anyone evaluated running FreeBSD with Intel's
> x86-64 extensions (which appear to be a copy of AMD's?)
> 
> http://www.intel.com/technology/64bitextensions/index.htm?iid=techtrends+spotlight_64bit
> 
> has intel's detailed instruction set reference on the subject.

If the architecture is the same then it's more of a problem for the compiler people
handle the lloonngg pipeline.

If the architecture is broken ... then someone will have to volunteer
to look into it.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200402250240.i1P2eXtV070993>