Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010 08:55:09 -0400 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Cc: Marcin Cieslak <saper@saper.info> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use MACHINE_ARCH for boot loader Message-ID: <201009080855.09578.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <slrni8cnu4.lu1.saper@saper.info> References: <4C770BB9.2070900@delphij.net> <201008270934.56323.jhb@freebsd.org> <slrni8cnu4.lu1.saper@saper.info>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday, September 07, 2010 11:52:36 am Marcin Cieslak wrote: > Dnia 27.08.2010 John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> napisa=C5=82/a: > > On Thursday, August 26, 2010 8:50:01 pm Xin LI wrote: > >> Hi, > >>=20 > >> The attached patch changes FreeBSD/x86 back to FreeBSD/i386 on i386 and > >> FreeBSD/amd64 on amd64. > >>=20 > >> Comments welcome! I'll commit it in by the weekend if there is no > >> objection on this. > > > > As others have noted, the 'x86' is on purpose, and I would rather it co= ntinue=20 > > to do that rather than this change. >=20 > Not sure about it, the loader and boot block are 32-bit code, aren't they? > (That actually made me to hack some patches to make ficl 64-bit, but that= 's > another story). >=20 > So I think i386 is better designation for pure 32-bit code I think. It actually is not pure 32-bit as there is a small bit of 64-bit code to transfer from the loader to the kernel in the loader. =2D-=20 John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201009080855.09578.jhb>