Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 22:16:25 +0100 From: Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> To: Erik Trulsson <ertr1013@student.uu.se> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, Roman Divacky <rdivacky@freebsd.org>, src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, Jung-uk Kim <jkim@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r219679 - head/sys/i386/include Message-ID: <AANLkTin9qY0BMii57rhy-XF82J5XXfvQ-4tR0ra-EOB2@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20110316200346.GA36431@owl.midgard.homeip.net> References: <201103152145.p2FLjAlt060256@svn.freebsd.org> <20110316004503.GM99496@mdounin.ru> <201103161233.16347.jkim@FreeBSD.org> <20110316174553.GA6367@freebsd.org> <20110316200346.GA36431@owl.midgard.homeip.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 16 March 2011 21:03, Erik Trulsson <ertr1013@student.uu.se> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 06:45:53PM +0100, Roman Divacky wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 12:32:56PM -0400, Jung-uk Kim wrote: >> > On Tuesday 15 March 2011 08:45 pm, Maxim Dounin wrote: >> > > This isn't really different as long as GENERIC kernel used, as >> > > GENERIC defines I486_CPU. >> > >> > Fixed in r219698, sorry. >> > >> > Actually, I think we should remove i486 from GENERIC at some point. >> > It has too many limitations. =C2=A0For example, I really love to imple= ment >> > atomic 64-bit mem read/write using cmpxchg8b (no 0xf00f joke, please) >> > but I cannot do that cleanly without removing I486 support or >> > checking cpu_class at run-time. :-( >> >> if we drop i486 I think it makes sense to require something that has >> at least SSE2, thus we can have the same expectations as on amd64. > > No, that would remove support from far too many machines that people > actually use to run FreeBSD. > There are probably only a handful of people (if that) who actually run > FreeBSD on an actual 486-class machine, but requiring SSE2 would mean > dropping support for Pentium-III and Athlon-XP equipped machines and > I believe there are a large number of such machines still in use, and > they are still perfectly suitable for a large number of tasks. This is understandable but I also think it deserves a poll at stable@ and current@. It might be worth keeping i486 for all of 9-stable but removing it before 10-stable. Judging from previous releases, 9.x would be supported until at least 2016. I don't follow the embedded world that much, but from what I saw, most (incl. Soekris) are moving to Atom designs which support SSE2.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTin9qY0BMii57rhy-XF82J5XXfvQ-4tR0ra-EOB2>