From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Jan 29 14:21:00 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id E99B416A4CE; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 14:21:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tor-adm1.nbc.attcanada.ca (tor-adm1.business.allstream.net
	[207.181.89.5])	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 8EE1A43D58; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 14:20:59 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from taob@risc.org)
Received: from tor-adm1.nbc.attcanada.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	i0TMKmwH014804;	Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:20:48 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (ncc0070@localhost)i0TMKlMP014801;
	Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:20:47 -0500 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: tor-adm1.nbc.attcanada.ca: ncc0070 owned process
	doing -bs
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:20:47 -0500 (EST)
From: Brian Tao <taob@risc.org>
X-Sender: ncc0070@tor-adm1.nbc.attcanada.ca
To: "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <20040129185426.GA93242@dragon.nuxi.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0401291714070.26036-100000@tor-adm1.nbc.attcanada.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: New AMD64 owner
X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform <freebsd-amd64.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64>,
	<mailto:freebsd-amd64-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-amd64>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-amd64-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64>,
	<mailto:freebsd-amd64-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 22:21:01 -0000

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004, David O'Brien wrote:
> 
> It is a CPU mode issue.  If you think back to your brand new i386
> and Windows 95, the CPU was switched back into real mode when you
> ran a MS-Windows 3.1 program.  Along with MS-Windows 95 doing
> "Thunking" for system services.

    Ah, gotcha... I had not thought about the parallels between this
and the 16-to-32 transition.  Cool, things make a lot more sense when
I think about it that way.

> Yes -- assuming you are talking about dual-booting.  My FreeBSD/i386
> build machine is actually an Athlon64 machine that is run purely and
> only in 32-bit mode.  Athlon64 is the fastest 32-bit x86 machine in
> the world today.

    Damn right.  :)
-- 
Brian Tao (BT300, taob@risc.org)
"Though this be madness, yet there is method in't"