From nobody Tue Nov 18 09:13:05 2025 X-Original-To: arch@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4d9f6G1cMtz6GmJr for ; Tue, 18 Nov 2025 09:13:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tpearson@raptorengineering.com) Received: from raptorengineering.com (mail.raptorengineering.com [23.155.224.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4d9f6F3n8xz3Hk0 for ; Tue, 18 Nov 2025 09:13:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tpearson@raptorengineering.com) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=raptorengineering.com header.s=B8E824E6-0BE2-11E6-931D-288C65937AAD header.b=acxyzDnA; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=raptorengineering.com; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of tpearson@raptorengineering.com designates 23.155.224.40 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=tpearson@raptorengineering.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.rptsys.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1EC27790A5A; Tue, 18 Nov 2025 03:13:08 -0600 (CST) Received: from mail.rptsys.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (vali.starlink.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id Y0n3v3OFTr48; Tue, 18 Nov 2025 03:13:08 -0600 (CST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.rptsys.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 394367790C84; Tue, 18 Nov 2025 03:13:08 -0600 (CST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 mail.rptsys.com 394367790C84 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=raptorengineering.com; s=B8E824E6-0BE2-11E6-931D-288C65937AAD; t=1763457188; bh=wZvbfCQ2WAhXPB7Vb0wvG3UQeQUPQl5lu9cbi5/Dm2U=; h=Date:From:To:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=acxyzDnAMp6Yj5IsbFCcPorEzuOqg1eIs0DOiGeKngNZ7MhwKb7we5WcEiz22yBdu Y695Ch5yvxvy0vC8eFx9MssvJvoSMGkz3dpoZo7UomAEUAjl5kTPqGVBUlGcnAQtr3 Spqu2gK+BTqSbXT2iAmQw9VraXexKl2wthkqExAE= X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rptsys.com Received: from mail.rptsys.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (vali.starlink.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id Ew2FHEOiy6m4; Tue, 18 Nov 2025 03:13:08 -0600 (CST) Received: from vali.starlink.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.rptsys.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 132957790A5A; Tue, 18 Nov 2025 03:13:08 -0600 (CST) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2025 03:13:05 -0600 (CST) From: Timothy Pearson To: Warner Losh , "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" Message-ID: <1795409779.114152.1763457185418.JavaMail.zimbra@raptorengineeringinc.com> Subject: Re: What's the plan for powerpc64 in FreeBSD 16 List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-arch List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.5.0_GA_3042 (ZimbraWebClient - GC141 (Linux)/8.5.0_GA_3042) Thread-Index: psJ8vUAWB3FZrzGOJVh8Sb6qRAOuWg== Thread-Topic: What's the plan for powerpc64 in FreeBSD 16 X-Spamd-Bar: -- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.00 / 15.00]; FAKE_REPLY(1.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-0.999]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[raptorengineering.com,quarantine]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[raptorengineering.com:s=B8E824E6-0BE2-11E6-931D-288C65937AAD]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx:c]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RECEIVED_HELO_LOCALHOST(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:46246, ipnet:23.155.224.0/24, country:US]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[arch@freebsd.org]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCVD_COUNT_FIVE(0.00)[5]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[raptorengineering.com:+] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4d9f6F3n8xz3Hk0 On 11/17/25 10:57, Warner Losh wrote: > Greetings, > > As we're getting close to the release date for FreeBSD 15.0, it's time=20 > to take stock of another architectures. This time, I'd like your=20 > feedback on the following plans. > > We'd like to retire powerpc64 and powerpc64le just before the FreeBSD=20 > stable/16 branch. > > This would give powerpc64 another two years of support in main,=20 > followed by sustaining support on stable/14 and stable/15 until=20 > the=C2=A0end of those branches. > > We've come to this point because the port is dwindling and we have a=20 > cost associated with keeping it around. The number of developers has=20 > fallen off so only a couple remain. Issues in powerpc are taking=20 > longer and longer to discover and resolve. The hardware has been a=20 > huge source of frustration for clusteradmin and we've no alternative=20 > for developers. There's only a tiny user base. We have trouble=20 > building packages for it. Also, powerpc has a number of interesting=20 > 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=20 > around, if we really can't support it and we're not actively testing=20 > functionality of the system, then keeping this around actually doesn't=20 > help keep us honest. It just gives us a burden we must bear. > > In my opinion, powerpc64 appears to have already fallen below critical=20 > mass, despite being a sentimental favorite for a number of FreeBSD=20 > developers. As such, I'd like us to consider planning to retire it=20 > before we branch 16. > > My questions today: Are you using this port? How many people are using=20 > it? And what's the installed base? It appears to be somewhat less than=20 > that of either i386 or armv7 based on user surveys and popularity at=20 > conferences. Also, any other comments you might have. > > Warner We are very much using this port on a number of machines, and have plans=20 to expand further.=C2=A0 We use the=C2=A0powerpc64le=C2=A0port in critical= =20 infrastructure applications. While we do not participate in the user surveys for security reasons,=20 and many other POWER users may be in a similar situation, I would like=20 to offer an alternate means of gauging powerpc64le (as opposed to=20 powerpc big endian) via the Debian popularity contest [1].=C2=A0 This clear= ly=20 shows the decline in powerpc64 but also the increase in powerpc64le=20 installs -- in fact, at least according to those statistics, powerpc64le=20 is about to overtake armel in terms of overall deployment base. Raptor remains committed to the architecture as a whole, and we have=20 resources to assist with development.=C2=A0 In fact, we sponsor several=20 FreeBSD build machines already in our cloud environment, and have kernel=20 developers working on expanding and maintaining the FreeBSD codebase.=C2=A0= =20 If there is any concern regarding hardware availability or developer=20 resources, Raptor is willing and able to assist. Finally, I do want to point out that this is the only open server-grade=20 ISA in existence.=C2=A0 This is the main reason Raptor selected it in the= =20 first place, and why Raptor has remained committed to its overall=20 support and containment.=C2=A0 As we continue porting to e.g. Xen and other= =20 operating systems, I would hope that we can reach a point where at least=20 the powerpc64le support is not only maintained but is able to be=20 promoted to a higher status within FreeBSD. Thank you! [1] https://popcon.debian.org/