On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 03:27:34AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: > Roberto C. Sanchez wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 11:33:14PM -0300, Marcello Di Marino Azevedo wrote: > >> Probably you are tired to see tons of questions like this, but... > >> > >> I have two new servers coming for a critical mission application. My > >> question is simple, will sarge i386 port (32 bit only) runs fine under > >> an AMD64 X2? > >> > >> For example, if I install kernel 2.6.8-k7-smp it will see 2 CPUs? > >> > >> Which 32 bit kernel runs better under AMD64 architure, 686 or k7? > >> > > Well, the 686 kernel is for 686 CPUs (which the amd64 is not). > > All K7 CPUs most emphatically *are* 686 CPUs, since they execute all > the relevant Pentium Pro opcodes. > > > Also, > > the k7 kernel is for 32 bit Athlon CPUs (which the amd64 is not). > > The K8 (in 32-bit mode) most assuredly *is* a K7. (What, you think > AMD would break backward compatibility? That's the big draw of AMD64.) > > So, the AMD64 (in 32-bit mode) is a K7, and the K7 "is" 686, either > kernel will work. > > > You > > need a k8 kernel, specifically. Of course, if you run a kernel with SMP > > enabled, and you have more than one processor, you will see more than > > one processer. > > This is correct. You need an SMP-enabled kernel. > > To get a 0.5% speed boost, use a k7-SMP kernel. > Correct on all counts. However, what is the point of having an amd64 CPU to then run an "inferior" kernel on it? I was not concerned with the question of compatibility, which you adressed, but rather which is the "best" kernel for that CPU. Regards, -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sanchez http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature