Re: [RFC] Rename various 'IA32' uses in arch/x86/ code

[H. Peter Anvin]

x86-32 is clumsy though.  "Original name that stuck" is perfectly legitimate, and having multiple names for the same thing is always worse then having slightly imperfect names.

On June 19, 2015 12:13:05 AM PDT, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>* H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> We have generally used i386 as opposed to x86 for that purpose. [...]
>
>So 'i386' is really the original name that stuck.
>
>'x86-32' sounds more appropriate to me - we should not perpetuate the
>i386 name, 
>as we don't run on an original i386 anymore ;-)
>
>Here's what I think sounds pretty natural:
>
>  CONFIG_X86_32_ABI
>  CONFIG_X86_64_ABI
>  CONFIG_X86_X32_ABI
>
>- CONFIG_X86_X32_ABI and CONFIG_X86_32_ABI selects CONFIG_COMPAT.
>- CONFIG_X86_32_ABI enables the 32-bit/32-bit system call ABI.
>- CONFIG_X86_X32_ABI enables the extra 64-bit/32-bit system call
>entries.
>- CONFIG_IA32_EMULATION goes away.
>
>> [...] IA32 in MSR names is part of the MSR name and should not be
>taken out.
>
>Yes, of course.
>
>Thanks,
>
>	Ingo

-- 
Sent from my mobile phone.  Please pardon brevity and lack of formatting.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/