Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2025 23:54:33 +0300 From: Vadim Goncharov <vadimnuclight@gmail.com> To: Minsoo Choo <minsoochoo0122@proton.me> Cc: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>, "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: BE (Was: What's the plan for powerpc64 in FreeBSD 16) Message-ID: <20251117235433.3c6bda40@nuclight.lan> In-Reply-To: <jgFdaXb00BH4MLmbHXQjyhRrVst6gCJPnfgLEj9K03Wyz8uPbaoUf4nmbdHI72gXAa1-cyI2yfASwYYIRYPk5AYx_r4BwlIwzoVyOXw-VaA=@proton.me> References: <CANCZdfrQthqYeGYD_9LRcH94JJZuF2%2BUxAqf7Lcoe6p5VzJf9g@mail.gmail.com> <Wd6TGx4GOC1XbKnCdGB3NtUUvsaFLiRqb_aW7m29BKARRj41wbyYiH5IHjZPEBe3Qs_SQ5DOKORCzEPDRqC01whFEwWcKeNtb27lTJGpb4M=@proton.me> <20251117215733.65553140@nuclight.lan> <jgFdaXb00BH4MLmbHXQjyhRrVst6gCJPnfgLEj9K03Wyz8uPbaoUf4nmbdHI72gXAa1-cyI2yfASwYYIRYPk5AYx_r4BwlIwzoVyOXw-VaA=@proton.me>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 17 Nov 2025 20:37:28 +0000 Minsoo Choo <minsoochoo0122@proton.me> wrote: > On Monday, November 17th, 2025 at 1:57 PM, Vadim Goncharov > <vadimnuclight@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, 17 Nov 2025 18:29:20 +0000 > > Minsoo Choo minsoochoo0122@proton.me wrote: > > > > > I was thinking about this as well since the discussion on armv7. I think > > > big-endian powerpc should be removed from releases from FreeBSD 16 for > > > the following reasons. > > > > > > - Big endian usage is not used widely anymore. Even most POWER systems on > > > linux run on little-endian, and most Linux distros like RHEL only > > > provides little-endian and not big-endian. > > > - As FreeBSD is a complete operating system, if the powerpc is causing > > > issues not only in kernel but also for utilities and ports due to lack of > > > developers and hardware, there is no need to maintain them. Linux is a > > > kernel, so Linux developers can maintain kernel only for powerpc64be and > > > other developers take the responsibility of implementing libraries and > > > utilities. FreeBSD cannot take this approach, and if the cost is bigger > > > than the benefit, we should remove it. > > > - This also applies to deprecation of 32-bit platforms, but there is no > > > need to consider big endian compatibility unless we have valid reason. > > > So far, all the major platforms we support are little-endian or > > > bi-endian, and even bi-endian platforms like aarch64 and POWER mostly > > > run on little endian operating systems. Is there a new architecture or > > > even ongoing discussion of them that will be based on big endian (or > > > 32-bit) where FreeBSD can shine? If not, there is no need to consider > > > compatibility for future architectures. > > > > > > This does not mean that such will never arise in the future, especially > > given that big-endian is better; and there were such rumors/tries for > > RISC-V. > > Right, we don't know if big-endian will be trend in future. However, I'm > against preparing next big-endian architecture too proactively. As I stated > above, I don't see any big-endian architecture where FreeBSD can shine, and > this includes RISC-V big-endian. A few weeks ago, someone tried to upstream > riscvbe to Linux kernel, and Linus Torvalds was strongly against it [1], and > I think although he talked bit aggressively (as always), his claim itself > sounds reasonable. > > [1] https://www.phoronix.com/news/Torvalds-No-RISC-V-BE. Torvalds, as usual in history, just aggressively pushes his unargumented shit, e.g. remember kqueue vs epoll with nonsense arguments just to not acknowledge BSD superiority in area; this time about BE is not exception. -- WBR, @nuclight
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20251117235433.3c6bda40>