From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263486AbUBRJ4y (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Feb 2004 04:56:54 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263927AbUBRJ4y (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Feb 2004 04:56:54 -0500 Received: from aun.it.uu.se ([130.238.12.36]:14018 "EHLO aun.it.uu.se") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263486AbUBRJ4x (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Feb 2004 04:56:53 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <16435.14044.182718.134404@alkaid.it.uu.se> Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 10:56:44 +0100 From: Mikael Pettersson To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Intel vs AMD x86-64 In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under Emacs 20.7.1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Linus Torvalds writes: > > Ok, > now that Intel has finally come clean about their x86-64 implementation > (see > > http://www.intel.com/technology/64bitextensions/index.htm?iid=techtrends+spotlight_64bit > > for full details), can somebody write up a list of differences? I know > there are people who have had access to the Intel docs for a while now, > and obviously Intel is too frigging proud to list the differences > explicitly. >>From what I can see from these docs, Intel's "IA-32e" is very very close to the natural combination of P4 with AMD64. No hyperlink stuff, but otherwise the same. The local APIC and performance counters should be exactly as in P4 :-) What about naming? IA-64 is taken, AMD64 is too specific, Intel's "IA-32e" sounds too vague, and I find x86-64 / x86_64 difficult to type. "x64" perhaps?