From owner-p4-projects@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 9 11:10:07 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: p4-projects@freebsd.org Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 32767) id C68CA37B401; Wed, 9 Apr 2003 11:10:06 -0700 (PDT) Delivered-To: perforce@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59A2C37B401; Wed, 9 Apr 2003 11:10:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from canning.wemm.org (canning.wemm.org [192.203.228.65]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF76943F3F; Wed, 9 Apr 2003 11:10:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) Received: from wemm.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by canning.wemm.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A975B2A7EA; Wed, 9 Apr 2003 11:10:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Marcel Moolenaar In-Reply-To: <20030409173830.GA549@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 11:10:05 -0700 From: Peter Wemm Message-Id: <20030409181005.A975B2A7EA@canning.wemm.org> cc: Perforce Change Reviews cc: John Baldwin cc: David O'Brien Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 28461 for review X-BeenThere: p4-projects@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: p4 projects tree changes List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 18:10:08 -0000 Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 09:04:01AM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 10:23:56AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > > > > > > On 07-Apr-2003 Peter Wemm wrote: > > > > http://perforce.freebsd.org/chv.cgi?CH=28461 > > > > > > > > Change 28461 by peter@peter_daintree on 2003/04/07 16:35:32 > > > > > > > > use -mcmodel=medium for hammer. Otherwise it generates > > > > 32 bit instructions for things like invltlb(). kernel model > > > > comes later. > > > > > > Side topic: are we going to call it amd64 some day instead of x86-64? > > > > This gets hairy... if the toolchain calls it one thing and we call it > > another. AMD marketing is trying to squash the "x86-64" name in favaor > > of "AMD64". Note that "AMD64" is what M$ has always called it... so one > > has to wonder... > > I agree with the concerns, but x86-64 is a particularly ugly name > and uncomfortable to use in general that I'm inclined to prefer a > name change in spite of the drawbacks. Think about all the scripts > and makefiles containing x86_64... *shiver* Could we live with a slightly modified toolchain that defines both __x86_64__ and __amd64__ ? I'd be more than happy to rename everything so that it was #ifdef __amd64__ and have MACHINE_ARCH=amd64 for $dir/amd64/* etc. But we can't stop defining __x86_64__ since thats what linux and the FSF camp appear to use. Lots of third party stuff will have __x86_64__ ifdefs. > BTW: To what extend is the actual name important? Is it only > 'uname -m' that really matters (toolchain bordercases aside)? Having $MACHINE_ARCH different to #ifdef __$MACHINE_ARCH__ would be an ongoing problem I think. Cheers, -Peter -- Peter Wemm - peter@wemm.org; peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5