Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 13 Jan 2013 19:56:47 -0800
From:      Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>
To:        Ian Lepore <freebsd@damnhippie.dyndns.org>
Cc:        Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, Nathan Whitehorn <nwhitehorn@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: how long to keep support for gcc on x86?
Message-ID:  <CAGE5yCoK-e%2BLxGZofy49xGFVk9p87FfNTXVgpU1UA1Gb%2B9fU2w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1358131900.32417.44.camel@revolution.hippie.lan>
References:  <20130112233147.GK1410@funkthat.com> <20130113014242.GA61609@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <CAJ-VmomrSFXcZg%2BKj6C2ARhpmjB9hxZATYJyRZB7-eRrcBLprg@mail.gmail.com> <20130113053725.GL1410@funkthat.com> <CAJ-VmomGKayr-1VucfwgodhXEHrXxx8r=9crHZJf74iVKZyTmQ@mail.gmail.com> <20130113202952.GO1410@funkthat.com> <CAGE5yCpB8dHLn0TaW=r0Ov39owOQVi=X5FFw%2BuQ=qZ9zYi5anA@mail.gmail.com> <20130113224800.GS1410@funkthat.com> <50F33B02.6040303@freebsd.org> <CAJ-Vmo=wz0Z5q27QDaxT7jskBoO9vG_BNwRNA6xizhmSmU-aEA@mail.gmail.com> <CAGE5yCoFgC02qYfgAmA6Apd7Q3CrOOGnPAVT-Jbk13iw_Cmw2Q@mail.gmail.com> <1358131900.32417.44.camel@revolution.hippie.lan>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:51 PM, Ian Lepore
<freebsd@damnhippie.dyndns.org> wrote:
> On Sun, 2013-01-13 at 16:58 -0800, Peter Wemm wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> wrote:
>> > ... ?
>> >
>> > As an embedded platform, I'd expect that people will want to support
>> > any feature which dramatically boosts performance whilst reducing CPU.
>> >
>> > Also, if Intel decide to keep trying to push low power x86 for mobile
>> > applications, rather than ARM, x86 may just make a resurgence in
>> > places you once thought were servers.
>> >
>> > 32 bit x86 isn't legacy and won't be for a long time to come.
>>
>> Our buildworld environment and embedded $everything isn't well known
>> for being embedded friendly.  I'd wager that if somebody was trying to
>> use an i386 kernel in an embedded device where every last thing
>> counted, they'd be using an external toolchain targeted for their
>> platform and some very selective cross-building.  Compiler of
>> $your_choice would be on the table if you were doing external
>> compiling, and.. the default in-tree compiler does support AES-NI on
>> both i386 and amd64, and the logical other choice (gcc-4.6+ and
>> binutils) also does.
>
> Ummm.  Search for "industrial single board computer."  They're not rare.
> Lots of us build products around them.  Some of us use FreeBSD to do so,
> with the stock toolchain.  I sure hope support for 32 bit x86 isn't
> fading away any time soon.

I had a quick look.  Yes, there were quite a few devices, but I didn't
find any 32bit-only that had AES-NI.

-- 
Peter Wemm - peter@wemm.org; peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com; KI6FJV
bitcoin:188ZjyYLFJiEheQZw4UtU27e2FMLmuRBUE



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAGE5yCoK-e%2BLxGZofy49xGFVk9p87FfNTXVgpU1UA1Gb%2B9fU2w>