Simon, how much you building goes? please do not do that at this moment. i am correcting errors and warning in my kernel building of platform/pc64, which is based on vkernel sources. i did see a lots of differences in the pc64 and vkernel (a shrinked pc32) that are mainly from naming difference, such as register, pmap, frame, etc.
Noah On 8/23/07, Simon 'corecode' Schubert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey, > > I just had a look into making the kernel compile for amd64. What I found is > the following. > > The platform files for pc32 and pc64 are VERY simmilar. In fact, everything > which is not simmilar is cpu-specific bits which need to go into the cpu > hierarchy. > > Maintaining both seems to be absolutely backwards. Why have different trees > for the same hardware? The hardware *is* the same. It is just the CPU, i.e. > the instruction set architecture (ISA) which is different. Everything else, > ranging from acpi to smp is the same. So the obvious and correct solution is > to just maintain one. > > This, however, leaves us with an awkward name. Pc32 for x86_64? The pc32 > name always seemed wrong. How about calling it "ibm-pc"? After all, that's > the basic architecture, since almost 20 years. Actually, the more I think > about it, the more it makes sense it me. > > I'll start picking out CPU-specific bits from the pc32 directory and move it > to the cpu/i386 directory (and try to update the amd64 directory in the go). > > cheers > simon > > -- > Serve - BSD +++ RENT this banner advert +++ ASCII Ribbon /"\ > Work - Mac +++ space for low €€€ NOW!1 +++ Campaign \ / > Party Enjoy Relax | http://dragonflybsd.org Against HTML \ > Dude 2c 2 the max ! http://golden-apple.biz Mail + News / \ >
