Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2025 20:30:52 +0000 From: Minsoo Choo <minsoochoo0122@proton.me> To: Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com> Cc: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>, freebsd-arch <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: What's the plan for powerpc64 in FreeBSD 16 [little endian too is listed for removal] Message-ID: <eWaPg023TZA7XuC-HlLfXxJbFINrzdwEG3JzD3GyEX6O9M5brwQphfj9TyId3gRfuE8l8zXhDZ48s3YO1qUAgzwuXl_WZ0MOcJN8v1aIDKM=@proton.me> In-Reply-To: <CE105C18-9E53-44B5-8C05-1AEC1C5668EE@yahoo.com> References: <CE105C18-9E53-44B5-8C05-1AEC1C5668EE.ref@yahoo.com> <CE105C18-9E53-44B5-8C05-1AEC1C5668EE@yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday, November 17th, 2025 at 2:54 PM, Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com> wrote: > Warner Losh <imp_at_bsdimp.com> wrote on > > Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2025 16:57:57 UTC : > > > Greetings, > > > > As we're getting close to the release date for FreeBSD 15.0, it's time to > > take stock of another architectures. This time, I'd like your feedback on > > the following plans. > > > > We'd like to retire powerpc64 and powerpc64le just before the FreeBSD > > stable/16 branch. > > > > This would give powerpc64 another two years of support in main, followed by > > sustaining support on stable/14 and stable/15 until the end of those > > branches. > > > > We've come to this point because the port is dwindling and we have a cost > > associated with keeping it around. The number of developers has fallen off > > so only a couple remain. Issues in powerpc are taking longer and longer to > > discover and resolve. The hardware has been a huge source of frustration > > for clusteradmin and we've no alternative for developers. There's only a > > tiny user base. We have trouble building packages for it. Also, powerpc has > > a number of interesting features of the architecture that make it the odd > > arch out. > > > > It's also big endian. While that may seem like a reason to keep it around, > > if we really can't support it and we're not actively testing functionality > > of the system, then keeping this around actually doesn't help keep us > > honest. It just gives us a burden we must bear. > > > > In my opinion, powerpc64 appears to have already fallen below critical > > mass, despite being a sentimental favorite for a number of FreeBSD > > developers. As such, I'd like us to consider planning to retire it before > > we branch 16. > > > > My questions today: Are you using this port? How many people are using it? > > And what's the installed base? It appears to be somewhat less than that of > > either i386 or armv7 based on user surveys and popularity at conferences. > > Also, any other comments you might have. > > > A lot of the responses you are getting seem to make no mention of > little endian also being dropped: you also listed powerpc64le (not > just the Big Endian powerpc64 support). > > I here remind folks that all powerpc64* is being proposed for > removal from the active part of the git repository. (The history > stays available.) > > [I'm one of the folks that used to use old hardware that FreeBSD > only supports in Big Endian mode: old PowerMacs. But they died > years ago and I stopped having any type of powerpc* context > available. I never had access to a modern enough context for > FreeBSD to support little endian use.] > > So: I've no reason to object to all powerpc64* support being > moved. > > The proposal certainly gives folks time to transition to 15.* > or other options for such hardware. > > === > Mark Millard > marklmi at yahoo.com Thanks Mark for reminding me. Although I'm strongly leaning towards removing powerpc64be from the source tree, I'm somewhat neutral towards powerpc64le. powerpc64le is actively supported on major Linux distros like RHEL and SUSE, but I don't know if they are actively used on FreeBSD. While big-endian powerpc isn't active anymore in the industry, little-endian powerpc is still popular in some enterprise market (POWER 11 was released just a few months ago). I don't know any statistics for powerpc64le, but if the cost of maintaining is greater than the benefit, I'm happy with removing it as well. While I support immediate removal of powerpc64be in 16-current, I think powerpc64le should be removed from in 16-current only if we really need to otherwise let's wait for 17-current and see how FreeBSD works on powerpc64le.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?eWaPg023TZA7XuC-HlLfXxJbFINrzdwEG3JzD3GyEX6O9M5brwQphfj9TyId3gRfuE8l8zXhDZ48s3YO1qUAgzwuXl_WZ0MOcJN8v1aIDKM=>