From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Oct 5 07:40:53 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 481791065670; Fri, 5 Oct 2012 07:40:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yanegomi@gmail.com) Received: from mail-oa0-f54.google.com (mail-oa0-f54.google.com [209.85.219.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E62B78FC0A; Fri, 5 Oct 2012 07:40:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oa0-f54.google.com with SMTP id n9so1938370oag.13 for ; Fri, 05 Oct 2012 00:40:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Y8nqbCv8dfPdeBVg8ePO/gwD4zl+YQd+i3NOQDVYKfU=; b=vm4y87dygNNFZDXsYMZDMkkHHkXZPNqCUgkshVpSW0U1db2teLHhpwA7JIr3Njz1iQ sOH9Yr1eI5DjPDZlE0t9raavvoiDkNYz97aI5OkgAqF7F9TVUaiD1WXRccQ4/nB3lbYN 3il3ykbmx7gMepKkRvO3NfyEHSIWWf6gJZRzuvFqlMt/sN/scrHwS+txx7k6cjAOpCx0 d2cJiO4a30AhAsFvyyGphQTRnstop1r0jtQ3DNy7zyP04dt1vvz++7oczcUzAxZUZMLv abAmyPrpeAosBG9mZZzlEUsWqOcELI4j9ANtia2M8bv2ppvt52QBErAVkgFcj833aGrF 1JaA== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.218.37 with SMTP id pd5mr6469060obc.24.1349422852035; Fri, 05 Oct 2012 00:40:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.76.142.201 with HTTP; Fri, 5 Oct 2012 00:40:51 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <86y5jll7kc.fsf@ds4.des.no> References: <506C385C.3020400@FreeBSD.org> <506DEB4C.5020508@andric.com> <86haq9hq2c.fsf@ds4.des.no> <20121005033244.GL35915@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <86y5jll7kc.fsf@ds4.des.no> Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2012 00:40:51 -0700 Message-ID: From: Garrett Cooper To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag=2DErling_Sm=F8rgrav?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Konstantin Belousov , Dimitry Andric , Andriy Gapon , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: x86 boot code build X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2012 07:40:53 -0000 On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 12:08 AM, Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav wrote: > Konstantin Belousov writes: >> Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav writes: >> > Dimitry Andric writes: >> > > Well, do we still officially support any real i386 machines? >> > No, 486 and up only. Personally, I think we should ship 586 >> > binaries (pentium-mmx) by default. >> There is absolutely no architectural difference between usermode ISA >> between i386 and pentiums, ignoring SMP-support instructions, which >> are usually not emited by the compiler anyway. > > By "binaries" I mean ISOs and freebsd-update, including the kernel. > > (actually, it's the kernel I care the most about) > >> Really interesting stuff started appearing with pentium pro, like CMOV >> instructions. Even more important, -march=3Dpentiumpro generates much >> better -fPIC code (probably could be activated by -mcpu=3Dpentiumpro). > > Which is why most Linux distributions target 686, but we can't if we > want to support small systems like the AMD Geode-based soekris net4xxx > and net5xxx out of the box. I would target the appropriate architecture (amd64) where it matters (amd64), and target the lowest sane common denominator on i386. In reality, what does a couple MB mean on amd64 vs i386? Thanks, -Garrett