| To: | Peter Horton <pdh@colonel-panic.org> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | [OFF-TOPIC] Cobalt 64-bit, what for? (was: 64-bit fix) |
| From: | Dominique Quatravaux <dom@kilimandjaro.dyndns.org> |
| Date: | Fri, 15 Apr 2005 11:20:54 +0200 |
| Cc: | linux-mips@linux-mips.org, ralf@linux-mips.org |
| In-reply-to: | <20050414185949.GA5578@skeleton-jack> |
| Original-recipient: | rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
| References: | <20050414185949.GA5578@skeleton-jack> |
| Sender: | linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org |
| User-agent: | Mozilla Thunderbird 0.4 (X11/20040306) |
Peter Horton wrote: Just out of curiosity, is there any practical interest in going 64bit on Cobalt besides the fun of it? One cannot possibly squeeze more than 4 Gb of RAM into a Cobalt box right? And doesn't 64 bit mode have costs of its own (doubled i-fetch bandwidth for starters)?This patch adds detection of broken 64-bit mode LL/SC on Cobalt units. With this patch my Qube2700 boots a 64-bit build fine. The later units have some problems with the Tulip driver.
--
<< Tout n'y est pas parfait, mais on y honore certainement les jardiniers >>
Dominique Quatravaux <dom@kilimandjaro.dyndns.org>
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Porting mips based routers, Waldemar Brodkorb |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [OFF-TOPIC] Cobalt 64-bit, what for? (was: 64-bit fix), Ralf Baechle |
| Previous by Thread: | [PATCH Cobalt 1/1] 64-bit fix, Peter Horton |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [OFF-TOPIC] Cobalt 64-bit, what for? (was: 64-bit fix), Ralf Baechle |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |