linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Kernel 2.6 for R4600 Indy

To: linux-mips@linux-mips.org
Subject: Re: Kernel 2.6 for R4600 Indy
From: Robin Humble <rjh@cita.utoronto.ca>
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 09:43:34 -0400
In-reply-to: <415420D0.60102@gentoo.org>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <4152D58B.608@longlandclan.hopto.org> <4152E4FC.8000408@gentoo.org> <41536765.9000304@longlandclan.hopto.org> <41541B8D.3060500@gentoo.org> <20040924131734.GC26710@lemming.cita.utoronto.ca> <415420D0.60102@gentoo.org>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 09:27:44AM -0400, Stephen P. Becker wrote:
>Mostly, 64-bit binaries are much larger than 32-bit.  Consider that the 
>scsi controller in an Indy gets about 2mb/sec throughput MAX (on a good 

/usr/bin/e* on i386 vs x86_64 is 17432 vs 12440 kB => about 40% bigger.
so indeed that's a fair bit larger :-)

I didn't think it was quite as bad as 2MB/s though, maybe 4. I'll dig my
Indys out of storage and give them a whirl.

>day).  Also, Indys don't support a large enough memory configuration 
>that 64-bit would be worth it anyhow.

indeed they don't.
do you get access to more registers or more efficient instruction sets
like you do on x86_64?

>What you would *really* want on such a machine would be n32 userland. 
>You get full 64-bit instructions, but the binaries aren't huge.

fair enough.

cheers,
robin

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>