Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
comp.os.minix
+ new post
About this group
Subscribe to this group
This is a Usenet group - learn more
Opinion Required for AMD 64 Port
Options
There are currently too many topics in this group that display first. To make this topic appear first, remove this option from another topic.
There was an error processing your request. Please try again.
flag
   4 messages - Collapse all  -  Translate all to Translated (View all originals)
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Sanky  
View profile  
 More options Nov 15 2005, 2:09 pm
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
From: "Sanky" <sanketsha...@gmail.com>
Date: 15 Nov 2005 11:09:33 -0800
Local: Tues, Nov 15 2005 2:09 pm
Subject: Opinion Required for AMD 64 Port
Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
Hi there,
I would like to know what do you guys (Andy, in particular) feel about
data types and sizes in 64 bit port.
Should long be upgraded to 128 bits and pointers to 64 bits or for the
sake of compatibility and ports, should long remain 64 bits and only
pointers be upgraded to 64 bits of storage?

Further, do you recommend any changes to the file system and binary
format as well to accomodate these new types and registers?
Although I'm not sure, as I've not researched binary formats and file
system yet, I think a little change is inevitible? What does the
community feel? Can we standardize upon the format as well?

I dont know if Minix is a community driven phenomenon yet, but I feel
these decisions are best left to the community.

Awaiting suggestions.

Sanket


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
lpalozzi@gmail.com  
View profile  
 More options Nov 15 2005, 3:21 pm
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
From: "lpalo...@gmail.com" <lpalo...@gmail.com>
Date: 15 Nov 2005 12:21:25 -0800
Local: Tues, Nov 15 2005 3:21 pm
Subject: Re: Opinion Required for AMD 64 Port
Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

Sanky wrote:
> Hi there,
> I would like to know what do you guys (Andy, in particular) feel about
> data types and sizes in 64 bit port.
> Should long be upgraded to 128 bits and pointers to 64 bits or for the
> sake of compatibility and ports, should long remain 64 bits and only
> pointers be upgraded to 64 bits of storage?

I think you'd want to stick to the LP64 model.

http://www.unix.org/version2/whatsnew/login_64bit.html
http://www.unix.org/version2/whatsnew/lp64_wp.html


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
ast  
View profile  
 More options Nov 15 2005, 4:12 pm
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
From: "ast" <a...@cs.vu.nl>
Date: 15 Nov 2005 13:12:34 -0800
Local: Tues, Nov 15 2005 4:12 pm
Subject: Re: Opinion Required for AMD 64 Port
Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
In all fairness, I have not thought much about 64 bitters.  Just from
what I know about the code, I think having int, char *, and long all be
64 bits will be easier than having different sizes.

I am inclined to change as little as possible initially when going to
64 bits. If the file formats etc can be kept the same (except for the
use of 64-bit ints), it should make the porting easier than changing a
dozen different things at once.

Andy Tanenbaum


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Segin  
View profile  
 More options Nov 16 2005, 7:42 pm
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
From: Segin <segi...@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 00:42:56 GMT
Local: Wed, Nov 16 2005 7:42 pm
Subject: Re: Opinion Required for AMD 64 Port
Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

ast wrote:
> In all fairness, I have not thought much about 64 bitters.  Just from
> what I know about the code, I think having int, char *, and long all be
> 64 bits will be easier than having different sizes.

> I am inclined to change as little as possible initially when going to
> 64 bits. If the file formats etc can be kept the same (except for the
> use of 64-bit ints), it should make the porting easier than changing a
> dozen different things at once.

> Andy Tanenbaum

A.out format doesn't allow muchin the room of 64-bit IIRC... Or does it
already do 64-bit (discarding the first 32-bits after endianess
conversions)?

We can always try using ELF64 as a last resort.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
End of messages
« Back to Discussions « Newer topic     Older topic »

Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2013 Google