[haiku-development] Re: Feasibility of a 64-bit port?
- From: Kira Scarlett <rhys@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 15:28:41 -0700
Since interest in Itanium seems to be pretty much zero, I'm currently
working on getting it running on x86_64. Getting it to compile in a 64-bit
environment is where I'm starting, even before trying to make the actual
code generated 64-bit. So far it looks like most of the codebase is in fact
64-bit safe, although I haven't looked that closely yet.
I'll post updates when I have them.
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 23:45:50 +0200, Ingo Weinhold <ingo_weinhold@xxxxxx>
wrote:
> On 2009-08-28 at 17:22:32 [+0200], Kira Scarlett <rhys@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>> To familiarize myself some with the Haiku codebase, I'm looking at
>> potentially developing a port for one of two platforms: either the ADI
>> Blackfin DSP or the Intel Itanium.
>
> No idea where Blackfin is used, supposedly embedded hardware, but Itanium
> sound sound more interesting. A port to the way more popular Intel 64
> architecture would be way more interesting even, of course, (and probably
> even easier), but any 64 bit port helps for that purpose.
>
>> Since Itanium is a 64-bit platform, how
>> complex would it be to run Haiku on a 64-bit architecture? I'm assuming
>> at
>> minimum quite a bit of code relies on things like specific datatype
>> sizes.
>
> I believe the kernel is in not too bad a shape with respect to 64 bit
> safeness, and off the top of my head I wouldn't expect that many problems
> with Be API code either. I'm not sure about ported code, but most of it
> isn't that old and should be 64 bit aware already. Maybe a few
"config.h"s
> have to be adjusted. Our (partially) old glibc may or may not give
trouble.
>
> However, while I'm sure there is a bit of code that isn't 64 bit safe
yet,
> the architecture porting part will be by far the main work.
>
> CU, Ingo
Other related posts:
