LUK for 64-bit?

[rebVODKA]

Is the LUK available at all for 64-bit?
Using Ubuntu 9.04 64-bit.
I can only find 32-bit binaries on the downloads page and compiling from source with the "make" command gives this:

make -Wall -C /lib/modules/`uname -r`/build SUBDIRS=`pwd` EXTRA_CFLAGS="-I`pwd`/include" modules
make[1]: Entering directory `/usr/src/linux-headers-2.6.28-11-generic'
CC [M] /home/tim/Desktop/unifiedkernel-0.2.4/module/ke/wait.o
In file included from /home/tim/Desktop/unifiedkernel-0.2.4/module/ke/wait.c:33:
/home/tim/Desktop/unifiedkernel-0.2.4/module/include/apc.h:35:28: error: linux/winternl.h: No such file or directory
In file included from /home/tim/Desktop/unifiedkernel-0.2.4/module/include/win32.h:38,
from /home/tim/Desktop/unifiedkernel-0.2.4/module/include/apc.h:39,
from /home/tim/Desktop/unifiedkernel-0.2.4/module/ke/wait.c:33:
/home/tim/Desktop/unifiedkernel-0.2.4/module/include/win32_process.h:34:32: error: linux/win32_thread.h: No such file or directory
make[2]: *** [/home/tim/Desktop/unifiedkernel-0.2.4/module/ke/wait.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [_module_/home/tim/Desktop/unifiedkernel-0.2.4/module] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-headers-2.6.28-11-generic'
make: *** [default] Error 2

[absfreedom]

I'm so sorry to this~~
LUK is not yet supported 64-bit OS now,
and, your running kenrel is 2.6.28-11-generic of Ubuntu, version of 0.2.4 LUK modules only correspond to Linux kernel 2.6.23.
If you want to use LUK in 32-bit system:
first of all you need to patch unifiedkernel-0.2.4-kernel.diff to the 2.6.23 version of the Linux kernel, and then, compile the patched kernel.reboot your system, choose new kernel to boot, compile the module。
the same step to wine，patch unifiedkernel-0.2.4-wine.diff to wine-1.0 and compile it.

or you use the deb packages for 32-bit system

[Dekar]

I don't really see a need for 64 bit, you can compile your 32 bit Kernel with Physical Address Extension (PAE) enabled which allows you to use >4gb RAM as well ;)

[ThaoKhai]

I don't really see a need for 64 bit,...

Ohh what?!
You don't this mean serious, right? All my pc are running 64 bit operating system and also most of my friend using 64 bit os as well.
When I decided to test LUK some time ago, I was forced to install some 32 bit Linux somewhere first.
And I don't complain about it, but there is a need for 64 bit.

[Brane2]

Also, PAE stinks, because:

- it still has 4GB limit per application
- it still uses old x86, which means 50% less registers etc, which means noticeable slowdown, compared to x86_64...

[Dekar]

Also, PAE stinks, because:

- it still has 4GB limit per application
- it still uses old x86, which means 50% less registers etc, which means noticeable slowdown, compared to x86_64...

The per application limit is correct but I barely use any applications which use 1GB. Concerning the registers I am pretty sure that's wrong. Registers might have half the size, but there should be the same amount. And for the most apps you don't feel any slowdown, there aren't many apps calculating on big numbers! Don't get me wrong, I am running a 64bit System myself, but I don't think there is need to focus on that right now!

代码: 全选

$ uname -a
Linux dekar-laptop 2.6.30-bpo.1-amd64 #1 SMP Sat Jul 18 14:08:10 UTC 2009 x86_64 GNU/Linux

[trappist]

in my life, now,I do not think 64 bit system had more advantage too

[Brane2]

Also, PAE stinks, because:

- it still has 4GB limit per application
- it still uses old x86, which means 50% less registers etc, which means noticeable slowdown, compared to x86_64...

The per application limit is correct but I barely use any applications which use 1GB. Concerning the registers I am pretty sure that's wrong. Registers might have half the size, but there should be the same amount. And for the most apps you don't feel any slowdown, there aren't many apps calculating on big numbers! Don't get me wrong, I am running a 64bit System myself, but I don't think there is need to focus on that right now!

代码: 全选

$ uname -a
Linux dekar-laptop 2.6.30-bpo.1-amd64 #1 SMP Sat Jul 18 14:08:10 UTC 2009 x86_64 GNU/Linux

Well, you are wrong. If you don't believe me, check Intel's and AMD's docs about AMD64 or EMT64.

x86_64 has 2x times the GPR( General Purpose Register) register count of x86 and each one is 2x the size of x86 register. This means 2x2=4 times more data in registers. Also, x86_64 has IIRC twice the SSE register count of x86, albeight they are the same size ( 128-bit).

On Linux this means much lower register pressure for compiler and better optimizations.

Also, bigger address space ( 48/52 bits vs old 32-bit ) brings several other , some of them non-obvious advantages too.
For example, address randomization is now much easier to do, also segments can be much bigger ( up to 1G), it's easier to prelink dynamic libraries to unique adresses ( and thus load an link programs faster ) etc etc.

I have 8GB RAM on my system and I love it. If 4GB modules were cheaper, I'd cram in whole 16GiG!