-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 What about 32-bit-only machines, or people that want to use a 32-bit OS?
On 10/08/14 22:37, ron minnich wrote: > One of the reasons I"m working to implement paging for 32-bit mode > is for our eventual change to 64-bit mode for coreboot. It's gone > on the back burner for a bit as I'm doing a few other coreboot > things first. > > I'd love to have the help, if you have time. > > ron > > On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' > Serbinenko <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 10.08.2014 21:06, John de la Garza wrote: >>> I understand that the calling functions in 32 bit C uses the >>> stack and this is why coreboot needs to use cache as RAM. >>> Doesn't 64 bit C use registers to pass arguments to functions? >>> If this is the case why not run in 64 bit mode? >>> >>> Also, even if cache as RAM is used and a stack is available, >>> why not just build a 64 bit binary? What are the advantages >>> to using a 32 bit binary? >>> >>> >> long mode (64-bit) needs paging table in RAM. So no 64-bit for >> preram binary. For rest it's theoretically possible but it's too >> much hassle for no benefit. >> >> >> >> >> -- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] >> http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJT5+iiAAoJEP9Ft0z50c+U2CsH/i5aWRH4VB4Kwa9k9P4Dl1sf NhnHlg+YBmr82oRKpCR2Dtq78J0JQKOZbc5rfy0IaROxdX6Fkr4CcTxmyqWOLEhW 8RFx03NLqjOgfyVZx8JBz21RfFOJt3YVdbGtMfrRlacucUrL09JD680iwB65Zeqy zooNe2RddsXUvTHflR13MJQoxTUCESlL7XSkNAnzjSBNkwcHisgI8oOlZBvxbzD0 WLul+mvCD15IvyeJuBOSIld1UWdRWMGqK0nUqGdaPMKqeRdwvLYPzpmEbd81YXAr 3cUXnC2sWW9h7xGv1N+IKvMjrjXwaD0czPCmZ/7wAvVlhEAzM3rOabmuvukgOuk= =l8NY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
