From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757311Ab2GKL1c (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jul 2012 07:27:32 -0400 Received: from lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk ([81.2.110.251]:58035 "EHLO lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752258Ab2GKL1a (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jul 2012 07:27:30 -0400 Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 12:30:55 +0100 From: Alan Cox To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Ingo Molnar , Catalin Marinas , Olof Johansson , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Linus Torvalds , Russell King , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/36] AArch64 Linux kernel port Message-ID: <20120711123055.293267de@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <201207102119.38495.arnd@arndb.de> References: <1341608777-12982-1-git-send-email-catalin.marinas@arm.com> <201207101652.18401.arnd@arndb.de> <20120710203527.GA16986@gmail.com> <201207102119.38495.arnd@arndb.de> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.0 (GTK+ 2.24.8; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Face: 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 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > What if they add 64-bit ARM support to arch/x86? AFAIK some of the > machines are going to be basically PCs, including legacy I/O, ACPI > and UEFI, so they are much closer to that than they are to anything > in arch/arm. The instruction set of course is different, but you > already said that this doesn't matter. ACPI5 doesn't require legacy I/O although I guess as before people will be reusing x86 components and might do so for hardware reasons. Alan