Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 12:23:31 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net> Cc: "freebsd-arm@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arm@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Armeb removal before 12 Message-ID: <CANCZdfpTnsx9e1BR7geb1dDxNm%2BE%2BXQOsGDry2dYcCDPte1J3w@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CANCZdfpuV-97=u-p4iHki7nQ4Kg9z=fPnatQ02GOPpGzuQfERA@mail.gmail.com> References: <CANCZdfoVYJbJEM-PhKL3Y_edp=X6Smb1uYHrEiYSm%2BZXsTmzdw@mail.gmail.com> <201806131739.w5DHd6sl040722@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> <CANCZdfpuV-97=u-p4iHki7nQ4Kg9z=fPnatQ02GOPpGzuQfERA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 12:09 PM, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 11:39 AM, Rodney W. Grimes < > freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net> wrote: > >> > I'd like to remove armeb before 12.0. >> > >> > It's poorly supported today. >> > >> > Nobody has tested the concurrency kit changes on it. And ck is now >> > mandatory. We don't even know if it works or not. >> > >> > Last time we asked, it took quite a while to find users. >> > >> > It maxes out at 256MB of RAM. This is barely large enough for FreeBSD to >> > run in. >> >> 64MB is usable for 32 bit archs, I have many VM's running in >> that configuration, so this item should not be in this list. > > > Yes and no. A VM is a different beast to a real box. arm requires more > memory in general, and a little more on real machines. > > You can run it in 128MB and do useful things, but not very many things. > One cannot, for example, run a wifi access point on arm in 128MB, at least > on this hardware. Adrian's ultra-stripped down stuff might be possible, but > nobody has ported it to this hardware despite it being ported to many weird > things. Likewise with the ZRouter project. You could run a simple sshd / > dns server on it, but there's lots of other alternatives for that which are > dirt cheap. > > One can, with a lot of effort, do 64MB too, but it's more effort than for > i386. Even at 64MB on i386, though, the number of things you can do is > quite limited. You can't build anything on that machine. DNS + SSH is > possible here as well, as long as the zones are too big. > > So I'll concede the point it's possible, and I'm not looking to make it > not be possible. However, we do need to draw the line somewhere, and this > is but one factor of many. Were it the only factor here, we wouldn't be > contemplating removal. Most people want to do more ambitious things that > can be done in 256MB is all I was trying to say. > Just to followup... On my 11.0 internal DHCP / DNS server (dnsmasq), I have a Allwinner A20 board with 1GB ram that runs between 100-120MB avm 120-1320MB wired with ~750MB free. That's what I've been basing my 256MB to run comfortably statements on. It's possible to do it with less, but it takes a lot of tuning, custom kernels, and legwork to make it happen. This box has only 14 processes, apart from kernel threads and is pretty minimal. Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CANCZdfpTnsx9e1BR7geb1dDxNm%2BE%2BXQOsGDry2dYcCDPte1J3w>