From owner-freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org Sat Aug 31 01:43:04 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-toolchain@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BFC7DF0E7 for ; Sat, 31 Aug 2019 01:43:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46Kzd40qCRz3Klj for ; Sat, 31 Aug 2019 01:43:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 1C1D3DF0E6; Sat, 31 Aug 2019 01:43:04 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: toolchain@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BE22DF0E3 for ; Sat, 31 Aug 2019 01:43:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46Kzd36yC9z3Klg for ; Sat, 31 Aug 2019 01:43:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1ED49567 for ; Sat, 31 Aug 2019 01:43:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x7V1h3RJ038531 for ; Sat, 31 Aug 2019 01:43:03 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id x7V1h3vZ038530 for toolchain@FreeBSD.org; Sat, 31 Aug 2019 01:43:03 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: toolchain@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 230888] Missing 64 bit atomic functions for i386 (libatomic) Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2019 01:43:00 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: bin X-Bugzilla-Version: CURRENT X-Bugzilla-Keywords: needs-patch, needs-qa X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People X-Bugzilla-Who: imp@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: Open X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: toolchain@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Maintenance of FreeBSD's integrated toolchain List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2019 01:43:04 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D230888 Warner Losh changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |imp@FreeBSD.org --- Comment #14 from Warner Losh --- In the past we've kept 486 for two reasons. As a core technology, it was ar= ound in the embedded space well into the 686 era, so there were latter-day versi= ons of that technology well past the classic 486s that are being sneered at a b= it in this bug (though these too are now quite old). The Soekris box was one example. Now that it's become a burden, I think a good case could be made f= or its removal. We can make the default i686, say, and give people that are interested in 486/586 until just before the 13 branch to fix it or we remove it. That blu= nts the criticism somewhat, and make people put their money where their mouths are... And the 'let's remove i386' is an outlier position. There's strong support = for it at least being a userland ABI that we support as a tier 1 platform, with= the kernel dropping to tier 2 for 13. Now, this may change in 14, but that's 5 years off yet :). There's always radical positions within the project... Be= st not to take what any one person says seriously... But whatever you do, I'd strongly suggest talking about it in arch@. It hel= ps to have a firm plan and good justification for that plan. If I may be so bo= ld, I'd suggest removing 486 support in the kernel; support for generating new = 486 binaries and make the default i686, but allow i586 builds (unless there's a good technical reason for not doing that). I'd justify it with the amount of work to support the 486 has become burdensome and if we're going to change,= we might as well go to something a bit newer by default, but allow the folks t= hat need it to build binaries (or not, depending on the technical stuff). I sus= pect that this will be close enough to what most people want as to make it throu= gh an arch@ gauntlet and even though that might be a bit painful, it will get = us to buy in. My own experience is that 600MHz pentium III are still decent enough, though for a desktop with a modern web browser, you really need something quite a = bit more modern. I know people are still embedding 686 and maybe 586 boxes still with FreeBSD, though I know of no-one that still needs the 486 stuff. This = came up 6 months ago and that was the result of my survey then... --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=