Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755505Ab2HXSRe (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Aug 2012 14:17:34 -0400 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:38181 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753609Ab2HXSRb (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Aug 2012 14:17:31 -0400 Message-ID: <5037C530.3000408@zytor.com> Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 11:17:20 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120605 Thunderbird/13.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brian Gerst CC: wbrana , Martin Nybo Andersen , linux-kernel Subject: Re: Drop support for x86-32 References: <201208231814.21168.tweek@tweek.dk> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 915 Lines: 24 On 08/23/2012 11:54 AM, Brian Gerst wrote: > >> - wastes time of developers who can spend their time supporting X32 >> instead of x86-32 or support x86-64 only as 99% of users will be able >> to run x86-64 software if x86-32 will be dropped > > The x86-32 arch is mature and well maintained, and shares so much in > common with x86-64, that there is little to be gained by dropping > kernel support. > Speaking as one of the x86 maintainers... we are currently deciding the cost/benefit tradeoff around removing i386 support. I don't mean general x86-32 support, I mean i386 as opposed to i486, Pentium, and so on. Dropping x86-32 support is decades away. -hpa -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/