Kernel Images

[James Wilkinson]

Tom Adelstein wrote:
> I'm a bit confused as to the purpose of your thread. I wasn't attempting
> to answer your question just point to information showing that AMDs and
> Intel processors varied.

Oh, they vary all right. But Intel innovations tend to get picked up by
AMD sooner or later [1]. So a program compiled for a particular Intel
architecture should eventually work on later AMD chips.

Your "AMD" could still, for example, refer to a K6. That's a
*completely* different chip (than an Athlon), based on a design from a
completely different company (NexGen) [2].

K6s aren't i686 compatible. I believe that Athlons are. So does the
Linux kernel configuration system.

> I do know that when we built a 2.6.8 kernel for Sun's JDS Linux it
> panicked on AMDs so we had to compile it in i386 mode.

Were those Athlons or K6s?

Interesting diversion, anyway...

James.

[1] With x86-64, the process is going the other way, as well.

[2] AMD bought NexGen when the K5 was late and underpowered, to get
access to what became the K6. 
-- 
E-mail address: james | Went to see the Rugby. Swansea are still sponsored
@westexe.demon.co.uk  | by EDS. They are still dropping the ball, fumbling
                      | every opportunity and making idiots of themselves
                      | in public. Is this co-incidence?  -- Alan Cox