| To: | "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl>, <ralf@linux-mips.org> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: CVS Update@-mips.org: linux |
| From: | "Kevin D. Kissell" <kevink@mips.com> |
| Date: | Mon, 21 Jul 2003 14:12:07 +0200 |
| Cc: | <linux-mips@linux-mips.org> |
| Original-recipient: | rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
| References: | <Pine.GSO.3.96.1030721124445.13489A-100000@delta.ds2.pg.gda.pl> |
| Sender: | linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org |
> Any justifiable reason for getting rid of arch/mips64? In my opinion, it should never have existed. The vast majority of MIPS-specific kernel code can be identical for 32-bit and 64-bit versions of the architecture. Creating arch/mips64 (as opposed to arch/mips/mips64 or Ralf's arch/mips/mm-64) caused duplication of modules that then needed to be maintained in parallel - but which often were not. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: CVS Update@-mips.org: linux, Maciej W. Rozycki |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | 64bit Sead build, David Kesselring |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: CVS Update@-mips.org: linux, Maciej W. Rozycki |
| Next by Thread: | Re: CVS Update@-mips.org: linux, Ralf Baechle |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |