Re: Why are there only i686 and i586 Version of glibc and kernel? -- 486 ISA, WinChip

["Bryan J. Smith" <b j smith ieee org>]

Alan Cox wrote:  
> Every example you give is 486 or higher ISA, as are the others you
> missed that I am aware of - SiS55x for example. Going 386->486 makes
> a really big difference.

Yeah, I'm starting to realize that (remember back to when I first looked
that Intel codebooks).  The paging is definitely a major plus, along
other things.

I think I conceded it in this post:  
http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2004-June/msg00039.html  

  "The rule of thumb is, everything that can be built for 386 ISA,
  should be built for it.  Optimize for 686 architectures (PPro/II+,
  Athlon, etc...), but make it 386 ISA compatible.  If that is not
  possible (e.g., NPTL), then 486 ISA."

But otherwise we agree on the "target 486, optimize PPro"?

Alan Cox wrote:  
> 240. And it runs 586 code. Trust me I've got one 8)

240MHz sounds more like a WinChip2 with the pipelined FPU?
But if you say it's an original WinChip, I'll believe you.


-- 
Bryan J. Smith, E.I. -- b j smith ieee org