Re: Dropping the amd64-generic flavour
What about k8-smp? francesco pietra On Monday 26 June 2006 07:58, Troy Benjegerdes wrote: On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 08:06:39PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 08:20:56AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: * Frederik Schueler: -generic is odd and too long. I am considering to change the naming scheme completely, and call the flavours 2.6.x-y-amd64 and 2.6.x-y-em64t respectively. Newer GCCs produce AMD64 code which is supposed to be closed to optimal to what GCC can produce on EM64T. Does it still make sense to distinguish between them? Or has it got something to do with the way the kernel sets up its data structures? The officially recommended way to build a distro kernel is to build the generic one. It's as fast as the specific ones because it uses some binary patching during bootup. The only thing you save with the specific options is a tiny little bit of space. I'm going to second this suggestion. The time I spend waiting for both a -k8 and -emt64 version to download and install when I'm upgrading a few machines is going to be far longer than any time saved by some optimizations that aren't already done by the generic kernel. Just make a 'amd64-generic' kernel and be done with it, unless you have benchmarks showing a real performance difference. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dropping the amd64-generic flavour
* Francesco Pietra: What about k8-smp? Do we still need non-SMP kernels in the age of hyperthreading, multi-core CPUs, and preemption? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dropping the amd64-generic flavour
On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 08:06:39PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 08:20:56AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: * Frederik Schueler: -generic is odd and too long. I am considering to change the naming scheme completely, and call the flavours 2.6.x-y-amd64 and 2.6.x-y-em64t respectively. Newer GCCs produce AMD64 code which is supposed to be closed to optimal to what GCC can produce on EM64T. Does it still make sense to distinguish between them? Or has it got something to do with the way the kernel sets up its data structures? The officially recommended way to build a distro kernel is to build the generic one. It's as fast as the specific ones because it uses some binary patching during bootup. The only thing you save with the specific options is a tiny little bit of space. I'm going to second this suggestion. The time I spend waiting for both a -k8 and -emt64 version to download and install when I'm upgrading a few machines is going to be far longer than any time saved by some optimizations that aren't already done by the generic kernel. Just make a 'amd64-generic' kernel and be done with it, unless you have benchmarks showing a real performance difference. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dropping the amd64-generic flavour
* Frederik Schueler: -generic is odd and too long. I am considering to change the naming scheme completely, and call the flavours 2.6.x-y-amd64 and 2.6.x-y-em64t respectively. Newer GCCs produce AMD64 code which is supposed to be closed to optimal to what GCC can produce on EM64T. Does it still make sense to distinguish between them? Or has it got something to do with the way the kernel sets up its data structures? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dropping the amd64-generic flavour
On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 08:20:56AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: * Frederik Schueler: -generic is odd and too long. I am considering to change the naming scheme completely, and call the flavours 2.6.x-y-amd64 and 2.6.x-y-em64t respectively. Newer GCCs produce AMD64 code which is supposed to be closed to optimal to what GCC can produce on EM64T. Does it still make sense to distinguish between them? Or has it got something to do with the way the kernel sets up its data structures? The officially recommended way to build a distro kernel is to build the generic one. It's as fast as the specific ones because it uses some binary patching during bootup. The only thing you save with the specific options is a tiny little bit of space. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---end quoted text--- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dropping the amd64-generic flavour
Hello, On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 12:47:56AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote: On Thursday 15 June 2006 00:42, Frederik Schueler wrote: -generic is odd and too long. I am considering to change the naming scheme completely, and call the flavors 2.6.x-y-amd64 and 2.6.x-y-em64t respectively. So what do you choose if you need a kernel that supports both? Both are non-obvious in that case... Both kernel images run on both CPU families. We do not have (yet) the need of a 486 style legacy package, as both amd and intel CPUs support the same instruction set from a kernel point of view. The only real difference between the flavors is cache alignment. Best regards Frederik Schueler -- ENOSIG signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Dropping the amd64-generic flavour
Hello, On Sat, Jun 17, 2006 at 11:15:13AM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote: So if you use amd64 now, then what will you use when amd releases an amd64 architecture chip called k9 that should have a different kernel than the k8? Same for em64t. I imagine the pentium-m derived chips will prefer a different kernel than the pentium-4 derived chips. Which one does em64t apply to then? We might add new flavors then, if the changes are are mutually exclusive between the old and new architecture. But considering the current release schedule, this is not likely to happen before we release Etch. Additionally, the change must be a grave one, like a new instruction the kernel would use (like cmov() or cmpxchg() on 686/k7 CPUs). Perhaps simply -k8 and -p4 or something would be better, since obviously they are amd64 kernels, since they are on amd64 architecture. This could be an option too. Best regards Frederik Schueler -- ENOSIG signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Dropping the amd64-generic flavour
On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 12:42:26AM +0200, Frederik Schueler wrote: -generic is odd and too long. I am considering to change the naming scheme completely, and call the flavours 2.6.x-y-amd64 and 2.6.x-y-em64t respectively. So if you use amd64 now, then what will you use when amd releases an amd64 architecture chip called k9 that should have a different kernel than the k8? Same for em64t. I imagine the pentium-m derived chips will prefer a different kernel than the pentium-4 derived chips. Which one does em64t apply to then? Perhaps simply -k8 and -p4 or something would be better, since obviously they are amd64 kernels, since they are on amd64 architecture. Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dropping the amd64-generic flavour
* Goswin von Brederlow: I would suggest keeping the name amd64-generic. It is easier for users to see that -generic fits all than -k8. It's also easier to reintroduce split packages if necessary. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dropping the amd64-generic flavour
Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: * Goswin von Brederlow: I would suggest keeping the name amd64-generic. It is easier for users to see that -generic fits all than -k8. It's also easier to reintroduce split packages if necessary. And should not need changes in base-installer and debian-cd and what not. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dropping the amd64-generic flavour
Hello, On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 07:13:57PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: I would suggest keeping the name amd64-generic. It is easier for users to see that -generic fits all than -k8. -generic is odd and too long. I am considering to change the naming scheme completely, and call the flavours 2.6.x-y-amd64 and 2.6.x-y-em64t respectively. Best regards Frederik Schueler -- ENOSIG signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Dropping the amd64-generic flavour
On Thursday 15 June 2006 00:42, Frederik Schueler wrote: -generic is odd and too long. I am considering to change the naming scheme completely, and call the flavours 2.6.x-y-amd64 and 2.6.x-y-em64t respectively. So what do you choose if you need a kernel that supports both? Both are non-obvious in that case... pgpRCEXWl1Oyp.pgp Description: PGP signature
Dropping the amd64-generic flavour
Hello, with 2.6.17-final, I am going to drop the amd64-generic flavour. The reason is simple: On amd64, the linux-2.6 package has 11 flavours in total, which is way too much. The build takes over 5 hours currently, as each flavour takes approx. 30 minutes on my 2GHz opteron. I want to get rid of 3 flavours, which will be: - the amd64-generic (installer) flavour, which will be replaced in debian-installer by the amd64-k8 flavour. - the amd64-k8 and em64t-p4 flavours, which will be dropped as soon as smp-alternatives is available on amd64 too. I will update the linux-di-amd64-2.6 package accordingly when 2.6.17 releases. Please point me to other places, where this will cause breakage, and I will help fixing it. Best regards Frederik Schueler -- ENOSIG signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Dropping the amd64-generic flavour
Frederik Schueler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Please point me to other places, where this will cause breakage, and I will help fixing it. AFAIK, you'll need to fix base-installer too. -- O T A V I OS A L V A D O R - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] UIN: 5906116 GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855 Home Page: http://www.freedom.ind.br/otavio - Microsoft gives you Windows ... Linux gives you the whole house. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dropping the amd64-generic flavour
Otavio Salvador wrote: Frederik Schueler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Please point me to other places, where this will cause breakage, and I will help fixing it. AFAIK, you'll need to fix base-installer too. Also debian-cd. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Dropping the amd64-generic flavour
Frederik Schueler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hello, with 2.6.17-final, I am going to drop the amd64-generic flavour. The reason is simple: On amd64, the linux-2.6 package has 11 flavours in total, which is way too much. The build takes over 5 hours currently, as each flavour takes approx. 30 minutes on my 2GHz opteron. I want to get rid of 3 flavours, which will be: - the amd64-generic (installer) flavour, which will be replaced in debian-installer by the amd64-k8 flavour. - the amd64-k8 and em64t-p4 flavours, which will be dropped as soon as smp-alternatives is available on amd64 too. I will update the linux-di-amd64-2.6 package accordingly when 2.6.17 releases. Please point me to other places, where this will cause breakage, and I will help fixing it. Best regards Frederik Schueler amd64-k8 runs on em64t? MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dropping the amd64-generic flavour
Frederik Schueler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hello, with 2.6.17-final, I am going to drop the amd64-generic flavour. The reason is simple: On amd64, the linux-2.6 package has 11 flavours in total, which is way too much. The build takes over 5 hours currently, as each flavour takes approx. 30 minutes on my 2GHz opteron. I want to get rid of 3 flavours, which will be: - the amd64-generic (installer) flavour, which will be replaced in debian-installer by the amd64-k8 flavour. - the amd64-k8 and em64t-p4 flavours, which will be dropped as soon as smp-alternatives is available on amd64 too. I will update the linux-di-amd64-2.6 package accordingly when 2.6.17 releases. Please point me to other places, where this will cause breakage, and I will help fixing it. Best regards Frederik Schueler And another mail. :) I would suggest keeping the name amd64-generic. It is easier for users to see that -generic fits all than -k8. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dropping the amd64-generic flavour
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 07:12:00PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: amd64-k8 runs on em64t? Looking at the 2.6.16 sources, it appears that CONFIG_CPU_GENERIC sets all the cache size options of CONFIG_MSPC (em64t), and the only other difference is that CPU_GENERIC doesn't set -march at all. So if -march=k8 doesn't break em64t then it should be fine, well assuming the cache size entry doesn't matter either. So from what I see: CONFIG_K8: CACHE_BYTES=64, march=k8 CONFIG_MSPC: CACHE_BYTES=128, march=nocona CONFIG_CPU_GENERIC: CACHE_BYTES=128, march=not set So does some expert on the instruction set know if the march is a problem? I imagine the kernel packagers know and hence know what they are doing with dropping generic. :) Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dropping the amd64-generic flavour
Hello, On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 07:12:00PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: amd64-k8 runs on em64t? It does, at least on the original nocona xeons, I tested it myself. Best regards Frederik Schueler -- ENOSIG signature.asc Description: Digital signature
