Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 07:57:29 +0100 From: Wilko Bulte <wkb@freebie.demon.nl> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@freebsd.org>, arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RANDOMDEV inspired realitycheck regarding i386/i486... Message-ID: <20001114075729.G333@freebie.demon.nl> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.001114100929.jhb@FreeBSD.org>; from jhb@freebsd.org on Tue, Nov 14, 2000 at 10:09:29AM -0800 References: <11485.974210886@critter> <XFMail.001114100929.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Nov 14, 2000 at 10:09:29AM -0800, John Baldwin wrote: > On 14-Nov-00 Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > > > If no /entropy is found it takes a full minute to do the randomdev > > seeding during boot on a P5/133. > > > > Has anybody run a 486 or 386 under current recently ? > > > > Have we defacto discontinued them from current ? > > > > I can see the advantage for the SMPng people in dropping the 386/486 > > and I'm approaching the level where I would be willing to say: "Sorry, > > stick with 4.x for i386/i486". > > Actually, the only pessimisms for SMPng are on the 386. The 486 has the > 'cmpxchg' instruction that makes SMPng go. :) Dropping 386 seems sound to me. 486 probably has quite some users left. DNS/NTP/whatever servers in dark corners come to mind. > > What is the consensus ? > > What is the current processor of choice for embedded stuff? Is x86 even a > good architecture for embedded work? That is the only place that I would see > the 386 still being alive... x86 has never been a good CPU for embedded. [eyes his trusty books collection for Motorola's 680x0 ;) ] -- Wilko Bulte Arnhem, the Netherlands wilko@freebsd.org http://www.freebsd.org http://www.nlfug.nl To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20001114075729.G333>