Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2011 08:53:43 +0000 (UTC) From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> To: src-committers@freebsd.org Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r219679 - head/sys/i386/include Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1103170845430.6104@ai.fobar.qr> In-Reply-To: <4D8190C1.4090004@freebsd.org> References: <201103152145.p2FLjAlt060256@svn.freebsd.org> <20110316004503.GM99496@mdounin.ru> <201103161233.16347.jkim@FreeBSD.org> <20110316174553.GA6367@freebsd.org> <20110316200346.GA36431@owl.midgard.homeip.net> <AANLkTin9qY0BMii57rhy-XF82J5XXfvQ-4tR0ra-EOB2@mail.gmail.com> <4D8190C1.4090004@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011, Julian Elischer wrote:
> On 3/16/11 2:16 PM, Ivan Voras wrote:
>> On 16 March 2011 21:03, Erik Trulsson<ertr1013@student.uu.se> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 06:45:53PM +0100, Roman Divacky wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 12:32:56PM -0400, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday 15 March 2011 08:45 pm, Maxim Dounin wrote:
>>>>>> This isn't really different as long as GENERIC kernel used, as
>>>>>> GENERIC defines I486_CPU.
>>>>> Fixed in r219698, sorry.
>>>>>
>>>>> Actually, I think we should remove i486 from GENERIC at some point.
>>>>> It has too many limitations. For example, I really love to implement
>>>>> atomic 64-bit mem read/write using cmpxchg8b (no 0xf00f joke, please)
>>>>> but I cannot do that cleanly without removing I486 support or
>>>>> checking cpu_class at run-time. :-(
>>>> if we drop i486 I think it makes sense to require something that has
>>>> at least SSE2, thus we can have the same expectations as on amd64.
>>> No, that would remove support from far too many machines that people
>>> actually use to run FreeBSD.
>>> There are probably only a handful of people (if that) who actually run
>>> FreeBSD on an actual 486-class machine, but requiring SSE2 would mean
>>> dropping support for Pentium-III and Athlon-XP equipped machines and
>>> I believe there are a large number of such machines still in use, and
>>> they are still perfectly suitable for a large number of tasks.
>> This is understandable but I also think it deserves a poll at stable@
>> and current@. It might be worth keeping i486 for all of 9-stable but
>> removing it before 10-stable. Judging from previous releases, 9.x
>> would be supported until at least 2016. I don't follow the embedded
>> world that much, but from what I saw, most (incl. Soekris) are moving
>> to Atom designs which support SSE2.
>
> not sure what is in the Soekris and other embedded machines but do keep them
> in mind.
>
> many are now 586 class I guess but there may still be some 486 ones around.
> I believe you can now get a 486 core in some arrays.
You mean something like this .. though it's not a fully classic? It's
one of the soekris boxes I boot/run as long as I manage to get a
kernel and a world in an mdimage booted from tftp... yes you can still
get down to that tiny size though there's a lot of ignorance for that
in our tree these days.
CPU: AMD Enhanced Am486DX4/Am5x86 Write-Back (486-class CPU)
Origin = "AuthenticAMD" Id = 0x494 Stepping = 4
Features=0x1<FPU>
real memory = 33554432 (32 MB)
/bz
--
Bjoern A. Zeeb You have to have visions!
Stop bit received. Insert coin for new address family.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1103170845430.6104>