From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Wed Nov 11 16:07:43 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A9E6A2CBD7; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 16:07:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bmcgover@cisco.com) Received: from alln-iport-7.cisco.com (alln-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.142.94]) (using TLSv1 with cipher IDEA-CBC-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "alln-iport.cisco.com", Issuer "HydrantID SSL ICA G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 333851C48; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 16:07:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bmcgover@cisco.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=5509; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1447258063; x=1448467663; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=2yMrpUDoa3XlR2OyDVRlfBUYMb5Pn1xjTY5ijJc//tY=; b=NqRB2jJw+i135/6zfYH/jycRflG7CKIPXSPb2/PidFbrjec3X/4bff3X J4OWj2/5Biq5Swq3/AOs1wGrb/YaAbtrfyvzBuDf8sJQZroax+jlRl+/6 XRLpjQC3dgEMNANC2ixeEo5Z7oMaZaxwi4py+hQsURi7+VSvJqi4mgud5 8=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0BLBQCDZkNW/5NdJa1egztTbwbADxcKhSVKAoFFOxEBAQEBAQEBgQqENAEBAQMBAQEBSyALBQsCAQgOAwEDAQEBLicBCQEXBggCBAEHBgEEAQcMBQQEiAUIDcRUAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBFASGVIN4gQaEOwEBAQQJDoRgBZZIAYUchR+CY4FilniDcQE3LIIRHYFWcgeEBwcXI4EHAQEB X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,276,1444694400"; d="scan'208";a="207281183" Received: from rcdn-core-11.cisco.com ([173.37.93.147]) by alln-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP; 11 Nov 2015 16:07:36 +0000 Received: from XCH-RTP-002.cisco.com (xch-rtp-002.cisco.com [64.101.220.142]) by rcdn-core-11.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id tABG7ZUn016338 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 11 Nov 2015 16:07:36 GMT Received: from xch-rtp-005.cisco.com (64.101.220.145) by XCH-RTP-002.cisco.com (64.101.220.142) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 11:07:35 -0500 Received: from xch-rtp-005.cisco.com ([64.101.220.145]) by XCH-RTP-005.cisco.com ([64.101.220.145]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.000; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 11:07:35 -0500 From: "Brian McGovern (bmcgover)" To: Jordan Hubbard , Warner Losh CC: Marius Strobl , Anna Wilcox , "sparc64@freebsd.org" , "Sean Bruno" , freebsd-arch Subject: Re: Sparc64 doesn't care about you, and you shouldn't care about Sparc64 Thread-Topic: Sparc64 doesn't care about you, and you shouldn't care about Sparc64 Thread-Index: AQHRGj3TBhRT1Czn10uKLkw9qAAqPJ6SsdyAgAJMRgCAAawjAIAAEQIAgABGZRk= Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 16:07:35 +0000 Message-ID: References: <563A5893.1030607@freebsd.org> <2AAC0EF3-528B-476F-BA9C-CDC3004465D0@bsdimp.com> <20151108155501.GA1901@alchemy.franken.de> <563F8385.3090603@freebsd.org> <56417100.5050600@Wilcox-Tech.com> , <39947478-4710-47D8-BAB1-FC93979570B6@mail.turbofuzz.com> In-Reply-To: <39947478-4710-47D8-BAB1-FC93979570B6@mail.turbofuzz.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.86.241.121] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 16:07:43 -0000 I have to step in on Jordan's side on this one. As a recently-former lab ad= min (June), we were - and I assume continue to - chucking Sun Sparc hardwar= e as fast as we can EOL the products which run on the platform, and to the = best of my knowledge, we haven't bought new gear since Oracle bought Sun. I= think I still have an SB150 sitting in a closet collecting dust for the em= ergency case which is predestined to emergency at some point, but we're not= even considering giving the boxes another life as second tier hardware - t= he x86/64 space offers far superior metrics in terms of price/performance/s= upport/replacement parts. This, of course, means that our customers will be eventually follow suit as= they do their next round of upgrades. While this means there will be a ton= of Sparc64 hardware around at low prices, I have no doubt it'll be a niche= community, like BETAMAX, Laserdisc, and HD-DVD before... If there is someone who loves this platform enough to keep it going single-= handedly, or nearly so, that's one thing. If the discussion is to divert pr= oject resources to keep it alive just because its one more platform, I have= a laundry list of things that I suspect will have a bigger impact on the b= roader x86 (and even ARM) community; then again, I expect just about everyo= ne has such a list. -B ________________________________________ From: owner-freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org = on behalf of Jordan Hubbard Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2015 1:55:38 AM To: Warner Losh Cc: Marius Strobl; Anna Wilcox; sparc64@freebsd.org; Sean Bruno; freebsd-ar= ch Subject: Re: Sparc64 doesn't care about you, and you shouldn't care about S= parc64 > On Nov 10, 2015, at 9:54 PM, Warner Losh wrote: > > sparc64 is the odd-man out currently. However, even if clang doesn't > work, the gcc external toolchain works well for other platforms. If it ma= kes > sprac64 more viable, then so much the better. Hi Warner, I hate to be a voice of pragmatism here when we=92re having so much fun dis= cussing it from an architectural perspective, but=85 What=92s the actual goal (from a future market relevance perspective) of pu= tting resources, any resources, into sparc64? I think that=92s the key que= stion that needs to get asked and answered here since we all know that: 1) FreeBSD is not NetBSD - it has never historically supported =93x86 alter= native architectures=94 just because they existed and might be technically = interesting to port to, there had to be some sort of user community numbers= to justify the time and energy expended for the project as a whole (and ev= en in an all-volunteer driven project, there is simply no such thing as =93= free=94 - everything has a cost somewhere). As phk noted earlier in the thread, the ALPHA port was an exception to this= rule simply because it was the first-ever 64 bit port for FreeBSD and we k= new it would buy us some much-needed 64 bit cleanliness, but it also fell o= ff the support roadmap and into the history books once ALPHA=92s market rel= evance had clearly ended. NetBSD/alpha still exists, all the way up to and including NetBSD 7.0, beca= use their slogan is =93Of course it runs NetBSD.=94 Again, FreeBSD !=3D N= etBSD. The emphasis on market share is and always has been a key different= iator for FreeBSD and part of both its own slogans and mission statement. 2) Sparc64 global market share has declined significantly since Oracle purc= hased Sun, leaving Oracle and Fujitsu as the only two significant players i= n that market. Sure, putting =93old equipment to work=94 is also always a = tempting objective, but it=92s one that really requires viewing through an = objective lens since the perspective of someone who owns said "old equipmen= t" is rather more biased than the perspective of the market as a whole. Th= e market as a whole appears to consist (in terms of global server market sh= are): HP (x64) 27.6% IBM (x64) 22.9% DELL (x64) 16.4% All others (x64): 24% (combined estimate, including Cisco and Huawei) Total: 90.9% [ Source: Gartner ] That leaves 9.1% for the rest of the server industry, which includes Itaniu= m, POWER4 and SPARC64. We can also probably safely assume that even among= st that tiny 9% pie slice, vendors are focused on the future since their ov= erall market share is declining (about 5% annually), which begs the questio= n: Is FreeBSD/SPARC64 aiming at the T5, even while Oracle themselves are s= hifting emphasis to lower-cost x64 systems for which FreeBSD is already com= petitive, or is it really just trying to keep some older collection of incr= easingly power/performance inefficient (by comparison) alive? Again, what=92s the long-term goal of supporting this architecture? The ol= d adage about =93picking your battles=94 applies here, no matter how enthus= iastic the small community of remaining SPARC users might be, which is why = I am risking lightning bolts of wrath from SPARC zealots in even daring to = ask the question. :-) Thanks, - Jordan _______________________________________________ freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-sparc64 To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-sparc64-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"