Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2019 11:55:10 +0100 From: Bob Bishop <rb@gid.co.uk> To: Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org> Cc: Cy Schubert <Cy.schubert@cschubert.com>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>, Shawn Webb <shawn.webb@hardenedbsd.org> Subject: Re: New CPUTYPE default for i386 port Message-ID: <EDBB2851-24FC-446E-B686-2F3D18787551@gid.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20f9896361c341736c5154c010cedf3fdcffc235.camel@freebsd.org> References: <CANCZdfoFPsjyuCTfm0dQhz%2BsgVHLEvMA8-E3-Yhciz67qdoKvw@mail.gmail.com> <20191005173411.l6gs3kszs7zcgfey@mutt-hbsd> <CANCZdfo6=r7BaGA8qKYSR9ba=azzxD%2ByDkN4aO87Oj1Qr9TKmA@mail.gmail.com> <06E29438-732D-4045-8FB3-5F2A082E9B98@cschubert.com> <20f9896361c341736c5154c010cedf3fdcffc235.camel@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 5 Oct 2019, at 23:50, Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org> wrote: >=20 > On Sat, 2019-10-05 at 14:20 -0700, Cy Schubert wrote: >> On October 5, 2019 11:19:41 AM PDT, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> >> wrote: >>> On Sat, Oct 5, 2019, 11:34 AM Shawn Webb < >>> shawn.webb@hardenedbsd.org> >>> wrote: >>>=20 >>>> On Sat, Oct 05, 2019 at 09:28:53AM -0600, Warner Losh wrote: >>>>>=20 > [...] >>>> I'm curious about the possibilities regarding 64-bit time_t on >>>> 32-bit >>>> Intel systems. >>>>=20 >>>=20 >>> Beyond the scope of this discussion. However, feel free to start a >>> thread on this. It's quite difficult to switch if you want binary >>> compat. It would affect system calls on the upgrade path and is >>> among the hardest types to change if you have any kind of legacy to >>> support... >>>=20 >>> Warner >>>=20 >>>=20 >>=20 >> This is one of the two reasons I believe we should deprecate 32-bit. >> Even supporting 32-bit compatibility long term is unsustainable. It >> is not worth the effort. >>=20 >> Putting a stake in the ground to say we no longer support 32-bit >> after 2038 would be desirable. (Sooner the better though.) >>=20 >>=20 >=20 > Only i386 has a 32-bit time_t. Other 32-bit arches either began life > with 64-bit time_t or have been switched to it. >=20 > For i386, if its current users (and I am one, for $work) have a choice > between "As of date X there will be no more i386" and "As of date X we > switch time_t to 64 bits and you will not be able to run old binaries > after that" I suspect people would choose the latter. >=20 > =E2=80=94 Ian Obvious casualties of total i386 deprecation would be Soekris 45xx (AMD = Elan (i486)) and 55xx (AMD Geode (i586)), we have small numbers of those = running recent HEAD. We are only still using them because they are more = or less indestructible (especially compared with a lot of the ARM-based = offerings). I don=E2=80=99t think we=E2=80=99d complain if i386 support = ceased on a reasonable timescale. -- Bob Bishop rb@gid.co.uk
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?EDBB2851-24FC-446E-B686-2F3D18787551>