On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 12:13:55PM +0200, Tonnerre LOMBARD wrote:
> Salut,
>
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 10:02:22AM +0000, mickey wrote:
> > or what you think loading 36bit physaddr is slower than loading 48bits?
>
> I think that loading 48-bits in one step is faster than loading 36-bit
> in two. It is also a matter of experience that amd64 memory access is
> way faster than i386 with PAE.
why do you think that tlb loader cannot load 64bits in one step
in i386 mode either?
> i386 is dying out finally, that's what I meant to say. amd64 has been
> elected as the architecture of the future by most if not all hardware
> producers. We got rid of one of the worst pieces of hardware ever, at
> least partially. This is why I suggested that it might be less of an
> issue to most people.
>
> For a good reason: nowadays, you just get an amd64 and don't have the
> problem.
lots of amd64 machines have much of their own stability problems.
it is as well a different architecture that requires recompiling
software that may or may not be 64bit clean.
of course running your favourite irc client would not matter...
cu
--
paranoic mickey (my employers have changed but, the name has remained)
