From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Fri Mar 1 00:14:35 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 B59FA151F30F for ; Fri, 1 Mar 2019 00:14:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cy.schubert@cschubert.com) Received: from smtp-out-no.shaw.ca (smtp-out-no.shaw.ca [64.59.134.12]) (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 7F16269EEA; Fri, 1 Mar 2019 00:14:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cy.schubert@cschubert.com) Received: from spqr.komquats.com ([70.67.125.17]) by shaw.ca with ESMTPA id zVoqgAM2NuCr7zVosgDfa3; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 17:14:31 -0700 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.3 cv=U/rs8tju 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=yKNiL60UbGpXvGItzWcA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=IjZwj45LgO3ly-622nXo:22 a=Ia-lj3WSrqcvXOmTRaiG:22 Received: from [IPv6:2605:8d80:402:e6fa:7662:4608:c1c9:df9c] (unknown [72.143.238.164]) by spqr.komquats.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E33242EE3; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 16:14:26 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 11:24:53 -0800 User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android In-Reply-To: <20190228192124.GB18089@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> 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> <866D86B4-6E47-46BA-BC4C-6E98DA94403E@cschubert.com> <20190228192124.GB18089@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: sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu, Steve Kargl CC: cem@freebsd.org, John Baldwin , freebsd-current From: Cy Schubert Message-ID: <029F8ACF-C9B3-49AC-80C3-C947EE9801A1@cschubert.com> X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfAQWWaT70gVDz1c12/1DOjWLPS2QhHzEHxqzGs05eDHs2xkXGt5ejphrDIGv432GV224/RLORiUooX7fjr3efjDhuEmFQm1R9666S5230KEodM5SCCkb SXt8I34L6ol4zC1WpekA5V/P37+leQbY7ycZzBT1xT9rfsBqmbF7cP/7g+SCpKQMDR8JB7rFJ8F+maWVgVMTyQcC6aNVcTZXKGS7x40szP5L4FvWNavwvJrx 21XkEpxrvRoA8cWVMSdVLCEnztX97DgFBCu7r7eZqec/9i2yE36NFxgp3U2s7vv3 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 7F16269EEA X-Spamd-Bar: ----- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-5.31 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_PBL(0.00)[17.125.67.70.zen.spamhaus.org : 127.0.0.11]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_FIVE(0.00)[5]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[cached: spqr.komquats.com]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.94)[-0.943,0]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[12.134.59.64.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.1]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:6327, ipnet:64.59.128.0/20, country:CA]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(-2.16)[ip: (-5.90), ipnet: 64.59.128.0/20(-2.69), asn: 6327(-2.11), country: CA(-0.09)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[] 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: Fri, 01 Mar 2019 00:14:36 -0000 On February 28, 2019 11:21:24 AM PST, Steve Kargl wrote: >On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 11:14:51AM -0800, Cy Schubert wrote: >> On February 28, 2019 11:06:46 AM PST, Conrad Meyer >wrote: >> >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 >> > >>=20 >> 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 thinking of removing the workarounds like F00F=2E Are there >any processors that are still vulnerable to this? >>=20 > >Ahem, sys/i386/conf/GENERIC contains "cpu I486_CPU"=2E >Is that a typo? I stand corrected=2E We should remove that=2E --=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