Re: Buildfarm coverage (was Re: OK, ready for RC1 or Beta6)

On Dec 3, 2004, at 2:33 PM, Kenneth Marshall wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 03, 2004 at 03:20:48PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>>     PPC            tested pretty often by moi
>>     RS6000            isn't this same as PPC?
> This is the IBM Power4 and now Power5 architecture which is
> different from the PowerPC.

Yeah, it's confusing.  I believe that Power3 (also known as PowerPC 
630), Power4, and Power5 satisfy the requirements of being both Power 
architecture and PowerPC architecture processors.

Not all PowerPC processors are Power processors.  I believe that all 
modern Power processors are PowerPC processors (the Power2 "P2SC" was 
the last non-PowerPC Power processor, IIRC).

IBM's Power architecture has architectural features for Server systems 
(with a capital S there) that PowerPC for workstations (Apple) and 
embedded (Moto/IBM) shouldn't be required to have, and is also IBM's 
own solely-owned branding.  Hence the differentiation.

That's what I've pieced together anyway.

You'll probably find multi-OS-testing (various versions of AIX, Linux, 
MacOS X on PPC and/or PowerPC) much more important than differentiating 
particular pieces of hardware in the PPC or RS6000 category, assuming 
both 32-bit and 64-bit is covered and also that SMP tests are made.

Does 'make check' test SMP?

-Travis