Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 10:50:48 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Jacob <mj@feral.com> To: Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-sun4v@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Dropping sun4v as a platform Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1105101050030.70707@ns1.feral.com> In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimUpeESJcHN75Vd=gZdXZzA5QPz-g@mail.gmail.com> References: <BANLkTimUpeESJcHN75Vd=gZdXZzA5QPz-g@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Since it hasn't had a champion for a while, that seems right. I even offered up my T2000 to donations@ and got no takers (it's now in use otherwise). On Tue, 10 May 2011, Attilio Rao wrote: > I tried to look to a previous discussion on this and I failed to > locate one, thus let me raise the point here. > > As I'm working on on largeSMP support, I was wondering how much sense > makes to fixing sun4v for this. > Besides having 'tinderbox/universe' working, not so much it seems. > The code is pretty much rotting and marius@ said explicitely that an > effective effort on that platform should probabilly be more similar to > what OpenBSD does with it. He also is in favor of dropping the support > entirely, right now. > > So what are objections (if any) about dropping sun4v? > > Attilio > > > -- > Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1105101050030.70707>