PERFORCE change 28461 for review

[John Baldwin]

On 09-Apr-2003 Peter Wemm wrote:
> Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 09:04:01AM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
>> > On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 10:23:56AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
>> > > 
>> > > On 07-Apr-2003 Peter Wemm wrote:
>> > > > http://perforce.freebsd.org/chv.cgi?CH=28461
>> > > > 
>> > > > Change 28461 by peter at peter_daintree on 2003/04/07 16:35:32
>> > > > 
>> > > >       use -mcmodel=medium for hammer.  Otherwise it generates
>> > > >       32 bit instructions for things like invltlb().  kernel model
>> > > >       comes later.
>> > > 
>> > > Side topic: are we going to call it amd64 some day instead of x86-64?
>> > 
>> > This gets hairy... if the toolchain calls it one thing and we call it
>> > another.  AMD marketing is trying to squash the "x86-64" name in favaor
>> > of "AMD64".  Note that "AMD64" is what M$ has always called it... so one
>> > has to wonder...
>> 
>> I agree with the concerns, but x86-64 is a particularly ugly name
>> and uncomfortable to use in general that I'm inclined to prefer a
>> name change in spite of the drawbacks. Think about all the scripts
>> and makefiles containing x86_64... *shiver*
> 
> Could we live with a slightly modified toolchain that defines both
> __x86_64__ and __amd64__ ?  I'd be more than happy to rename everything
> so that it was #ifdef __amd64__ and have MACHINE_ARCH=amd64 for
> $dir/amd64/* etc.  But we can't stop defining __x86_64__ since thats what
> linux and the FSF camp appear to use.  Lots of third party stuff will have
> __x86_64__ ifdefs.

This would work for me.  This is similar to how sparc64 defines both
__sparc64__ and __sparc_v9__, etc.

>> BTW: To what extend is the actual name important? Is it only
>> 'uname -m' that really matters (toolchain bordercases aside)?
> 
> Having $MACHINE_ARCH different to #ifdef __$MACHINE_ARCH__ would be an
> ongoing problem I think.

Yes, we would need to make it consistent across the board as far
as FreeBSD sources are concerned.  I prefer amd64 personally as
x86-64 is indeed an ugly name. :)

-- 

John Baldwin <jhb at FreeBSD.org>  <><  http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
"Power Users Use the Power to Serve!"  -  http://www.FreeBSD.org/