2000-10-27 19:47:58

by Horst H. von Brand

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpu detection fixes for test10-pre4

"H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>said:
> Alan Cox wrote:

[...]

> > > We should never have used anything but "i386" as the utsname... sigh.

> > Its questionable if we should include the 'i'

> True enough, personally I prefer "x86".

ia32 is the official name. OTOH, i[3-6]86 _are_ different beasts...
--
Dr. Horst H. von Brand mailto:[email protected]
Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239
Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513


2000-10-27 20:03:21

by H. Peter Anvin

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpu detection fixes for test10-pre4

Horst von Brand wrote:
>
> "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>said:
> > Alan Cox wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > > We should never have used anything but "i386" as the utsname... sigh.
>
> > > Its questionable if we should include the 'i'
>
> > True enough, personally I prefer "x86".
>
> ia32 is the official name. OTOH, i[3-6]86 _are_ different beasts...
>

IA32 is a retcon, and is used only by Intel anyway. There are
differences between the i686 lines that are significantly bigger than
between the i486 and i586, and that doesn't even begin to count non-Intel
chips.

However, changing it to "i386" consistently would still work with
existing software. Using "x86" or "ia32" or "ix86pc" (what Solaris calls
it) would break stuff.

-hpa

--
<[email protected]> at work, <[email protected]> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt

2000-10-27 20:55:12

by Alan Cox

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpu detection fixes for test10-pre4

> > True enough, personally I prefer "x86".
>
> ia32 is the official name. OTOH, i[3-6]86 _are_ different beasts...

ia32 is an intel trademark. Using it for non intel products is probably an
actionable matter ..

2000-10-27 21:14:44

by H. Peter Anvin

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpu detection fixes for test10-pre4

Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > > True enough, personally I prefer "x86".
> >
> > ia32 is the official name. OTOH, i[3-6]86 _are_ different beasts...
>
> ia32 is an intel trademark. Using it for non intel products is probably an
> actionable matter ..
>

Yet another reason to ignore it.

-hpa

--
<[email protected]> at work, <[email protected]> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt

2000-10-28 04:33:49

by Barry K. Nathan

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: IA-32 (was Re: [PATCH] cpu detection fixes for test10-pre4)

H. Peter Anvin wrote:

> Alan Cox wrote:

[snip]

> > ia32 is an intel trademark. Using it for non intel products is probably an
> > actionable matter ..
> >
>
> Yet another reason to ignore it.

Speaking of using it for non-Intel products, this is a line from
Documentation/Changes in Linux 2.4.0-test10-pre6:

Linux on IA-32 has recently switched from using as86 to using gas for

Should we change that to x86 or something?

-Barry K. Nathan <[email protected]>

2000-10-28 06:03:35

by H. Peter Anvin

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: IA-32 (was Re: [PATCH] cpu detection fixes for test10-pre4)

"Barry K. Nathan" wrote:
>
> H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
> > Alan Cox wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > > ia32 is an intel trademark. Using it for non intel products is probably an
> > > actionable matter ..
> > >
> >
> > Yet another reason to ignore it.
>
> Speaking of using it for non-Intel products, this is a line from
> Documentation/Changes in Linux 2.4.0-test10-pre6:
>
> Linux on IA-32 has recently switched from using as86 to using gas for
>
> Should we change that to x86 or something?
>

Since Linux generally calls this i386 throughout, I would stick with
calling it i386.

-hpa

--
<[email protected]> at work, <[email protected]> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt