On 01/28/11 14:57, Amit Kulkarni wrote: > Updated diff based on private Atom feedback and bigmem feedback.
In short, no. In long: well, see notes within. > Index: amd64.html > =================================================================== > RCS file: /cvs/www/amd64.html,v > retrieving revision 1.228 > diff -u -r1.228 amd64.html > --- amd64.html 1 Nov 2010 22:06:58 -0000 1.228 > +++ amd64.html 28 Jan 2011 19:55:09 -0000 > @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ > <hr> > > <p> > -OpenBSD/amd64 runs on AMD's Athlon-64 family of processors in 64-bit mode. > +OpenBSD/amd64 runs on AMD's Opteron-64/Athlon-64 family of processors > in 64-bit mode. I think this is already quite correct, if we consider the Opteron part of the Athlon64 family. IF you are going to get really picky about this, you need to do your homework, as I'll pick you back. * It's Opteron, not Opteron-64. * If I read it as it is, I think there's a strong possibility my 64 bit happy Sempron might run. After your change, I start thinking you have itemized everything that works...and thus, my Sempron won't work. I lose, my Sempron works fine, thank you very much. And here's where it gets ugly...not all the Semprons do. * Athlon Neo? Turion? Athlon X2, X3, X4...? Phenom? And what have we gained by enlarging the list? nothing. > It also runs on processors made by other manufacturers which have cloned > the AMD64 extensions. (Some Intel processors lack support for important > PAE NX bit, which means those machines will run without any W^X support -- > @@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ > <p> > The only major shortcoming at this time is that the kernel debugger > <a > href="http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=ddb&arch=amd64&sek > tion=4">ddb</a> > -is somewhat poor. > +is somewhat poor. There is no support yet for memory greater than 4 GB. this probably does need a note somewhere, but I think it can be done better. > <hr> > <a name="hardware"></a> > @@ -62,7 +62,7 @@ > > <p> > All versions of the AMD Athlon 64 processors and their clones are > -supported. > +supported. This includes AMD Opteron, AMD Phenom, AMD Athlon, Intel > Nehalem (Core i3, i5, and i7), and 64 bit Intel Atom. again, you take a broad general statement which is accurate and turn it into an incomplete (and wrong -- many Athlons are NOT amd64 compatable! The name predates the 64 bit instruction set) specific statement. I'm not even gonna start listing the Intel systems you skipped over there, and a very high percentage of the Intel Atom chips in consumer hands (and I believe some still being sold) are NOT AMD64 compatible. It's all covered under "clone" quite nicely and to my satisfaction. A lot of the early Intel AMD64-compatible chips screwed up their AMD64 compatibility to the point where you basically just have to try it and see if YOUR chip works. It is not practical to enumerate every marketing name for every chip out there (I see an attempt was made on the i386 page, though that should be a legacy platform now and thus easier, but good ol' Intel is still making new i386-only chips (or at least was, as of the first generations of Atom...*sigh*). There's also just no point, and a lot more future maintenance for this page. We are, actually, trying to cut down the itemized lists of devices supported, not add to them. It isn't about having the longest list, it is about having the most useful list. > <h4>SMP support</h4> > Starting with OpenBSD 3.6, OpenBSD/amd64 supports most SMP > > > On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Amit Kulkarni <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi misc, >> >> I don't know where to post www updates. www seems to be heavily >> spammed and nobody uses it. And I don't want to spam specific people. www@ is the right place. It's read by the people that need to read it. However, your mailer is mangling diffs still (line wraps, two leading spaces where there should be one, etc.). Mail the diff to yourself, see if you can apply it. Nick.
