Re: amd64 as default architecture
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 14:34:34 -0700, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 08:51:17PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 09:18:21PM +0200, Sven Joachim wrote:
> > > On 2012-05-22 20:40 +0200, Simon McVittie wrote:
> > > > On 22/05/12 19:24, Sven Joachim wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> and anything that uses libx86 won't work either (#492470).
> > > The lrmi backend uses vm86 mode which is not supported under an x86_64
> > > kernel.
> > So the x86emu backend should be built too if there are any 64-bit
> > systems that need libx86 - and maybe for other reasons as well.
> > That's not a big deal, though, surely?
> Which backend to use is a compile time option, so this would be
> switching to always use the x86emu backend. Not a big issue if we're
> going to drop 32 bit kernels entirely, a performance impact on those
> machines if we're not.
When is vm86 mode ever a fast path?
FWIW X used to have a way to build both vm86 and x86emu backends, and
fall back to x86emu if it got -ENOSYS. Now it just uses x86emu.