From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Thu Feb 28 19:15:25 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AAE315140ED for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 19:15:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cy.schubert@cschubert.com) Received: from smtp-out-no.shaw.ca (smtp-out-no.shaw.ca [64.59.134.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "Client", Issuer "CA" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B50782F47; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 19:15:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cy.schubert@cschubert.com) Received: from spqr.komquats.com ([70.67.125.17]) by shaw.ca with ESMTPA id zR9HgDvojqO6dzR9JgdPBW; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 12:15:17 -0700 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.3 cv=B/XHL9lM c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=VFtTW3WuZNDh6VkGe7fA3g==:117 a=VFtTW3WuZNDh6VkGe7fA3g==:17 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=xqWC_Br6kY4A:10 a=CFTnQlWoA9kA:10 a=6I5d2MoRAAAA:8 a=YxBL1-UpAAAA:8 a=L5W3fVIDw7R9AlMd5dMA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=IjZwj45LgO3ly-622nXo:22 a=Ia-lj3WSrqcvXOmTRaiG:22 Received: from [IPv6:2605:8d80:402:e6fa:7662:4608:c1c9:df9c] (unknown [72.143.238.20]) by spqr.komquats.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 804032527; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 11:15:15 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 11:14:51 -0800 User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android In-Reply-To: References: <20190222033924.GA25285@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20190222060410.GA25817@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20190223032644.GA14058@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20190223163947.GB18805@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20190228183214.GA17372@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: r343567 aka PAE vs non-PAE merge breaks i386 freebsd To: cem@freebsd.org, Conrad Meyer , sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu CC: John Baldwin , freebsd-current From: Cy Schubert Message-ID: <866D86B4-6E47-46BA-BC4C-6E98DA94403E@cschubert.com> X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfF4/MGsx8d7oxHB/A9k0/h8CkaY1vu5hfipVZva6G7/0eFOL82D/XmxhMWr0J3Mi7L+w1p4mqc4MM8rgEpsCx1VFb8IbgZ8uLX0vIR/BBNhEEOdXAjUW cGaCj73RjOO1PoQRz39rkwl/HoXyuB7xiy6xinAACrSFl954LkysAHr0Po8bhFQHNP7Cdh9dxuy8+SOGV9RbYqkrnSZSR3TgHvmWhqS1RyNLOT8RWSnJA6Eu 1l6VhmfqnZvnll2QWH9CofFpZfgBAv598yZO9fq5K2ztF/zLzQQPuw/49KPg9ZD0 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 3B50782F47 X-Spamd-Bar: ----- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-5.35 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(-2.16)[ip: (-5.95), ipnet: 64.59.128.0/20(-2.68), asn: 6327(-2.10), country: CA(-0.09)]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; RCPT_COUNT_FIVE(0.00)[5]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[spqr.komquats.com]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.97)[-0.972,0]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[13.134.59.64.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.1]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:6327, ipnet:64.59.128.0/20, country:CA]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_PBL(0.00)[17.125.67.70.zen.spamhaus.org : 127.0.0.11] X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 19:15:25 -0000 On February 28, 2019 11:06:46 AM PST, Conrad Meyer wrot= e: >On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 10:32 AM Steve Kargl > wrote: >> This is interesting as well=2E Does this mean that amd64 is now >> the only tier 1 platform and all other architectures are after >> thoughts? > >This has been the de facto truth for years=2E i386 is mostly only >supported by virtue of sharing code with amd64=2E There are efforts to >promote arm64 to Tier 1, but it isn't there yet=2E Power8+ might be >another good alternative Tier 1 candidate eventually=2E None have >anything like the developer popularity that amd64 enjoys=2E > >Conrad >_______________________________________________ >freebsd-current@freebsd=2Eorg mailing list >https://lists=2Efreebsd=2Eorg/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current >To unsubscribe, send any mail to >"freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd=2Eorg" We deprecated and removed support for 386 and 486 processors=2E We should = consider removing support for low end Pentium as well=2E I'm specifically t= hinking of removing the workarounds like F00F=2E Are there any processors t= hat are still vulnerable to this? --=20 Pardon the typos and autocorrect, small keyboard in use=2E Cheers, Cy Schubert FreeBSD UNIX: Web: http://www=2EFreeBSD=2Eorg The need of the many outweighs the greed of the few=2E