From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751443AbXCNQxH (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Mar 2007 12:53:07 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751530AbXCNQxH (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Mar 2007 12:53:07 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.24]:45283 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751443AbXCNQxF (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Mar 2007 12:53:05 -0400 Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 09:52:24 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Jan Engelhardt cc: Steven Rostedt , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Ingo Molnar , Chris Wright , Rusty Russell , Andi Kleen , Glauber de Oliveira Costa Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/18] Make common x86 arch area for i386 and x86_64 - Take 2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20070314050819.536207642@goodmis.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 14 Mar 2007, Jan Engelhardt wrote: > > > >Seems appropriate, but I really don't care what it's called. One thing about > >this name, is that typing arch/x86 doesn't tab complete x86_64 anymore. > >But if you can think of something better, I'd be happy to apply it. > > 80x86 > 8086 > ia32 <- I'd go with this for lack of more entries on this list. But the whole point is that this is *not* a 32-bit file. It's a file *shared* between 32-bit and 64-bit kernels. Which is why plain "x86" is the right name. Yeah, Intel calls it "IA" these days, but that's just crazy speak (and probably a combination of a reaction against "amd64" and a way to hide the embarrassment that is "ia64" by confusing the naming so much that one day people won't remember that there was _another_ IA that was a total failure). Linus