Dave Engebretsen engebret at vnet.ibm.com
Thu Jan 8 02:02:22 EST 2004

olof at austin.ibm.com wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Jan 2004, Dave Engebretsen wrote:
>>Is a single binary for Apple & pSeries a goal?  While it has some
>>obvious advantages, there is likely to be a number of areas (the
>>spinlock discussion being one) where the goals are quite different.
> Are they really all that different? We need to keep the pSeries code
> running smoothly on a small-config SMP machine too (i.e. p615 and the
> like).
> -Olof

Maybe not - just raising the debate.  Nothing is all this will not keep
the code running smoothly on small config p615 machines.  In many ways,
the more advanced virtualaztion results in machines which are much
smaller than anything else, so tuning for small is good for i/pSeries too.

Everything being equal, I would just as soon see a common binary.  But
items like HMT priorities are almost certainly going to exist in the Mac
binaries -- frankly, in the scheme of things a few extra noops in the
kernel are not going to be the performance bottleneck an end user sees.


** Sent via the linuxppc64-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

More information about the Linuxppc64-dev mailing list