Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2019 14:20:24 -0700 From: Cy Schubert <Cy.schubert@cschubert.com> To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>, Shawn Webb <shawn.webb@hardenedbsd.org> Subject: Re: New CPUTYPE default for i386 port Message-ID: <06E29438-732D-4045-8FB3-5F2A082E9B98@cschubert.com> In-Reply-To: <CANCZdfo6=r7BaGA8qKYSR9ba=azzxD%2ByDkN4aO87Oj1Qr9TKmA@mail.gmail.com> References: <CANCZdfoFPsjyuCTfm0dQhz%2BsgVHLEvMA8-E3-Yhciz67qdoKvw@mail.gmail.com> <20191005173411.l6gs3kszs7zcgfey@mutt-hbsd> <CANCZdfo6=r7BaGA8qKYSR9ba=azzxD%2ByDkN4aO87Oj1Qr9TKmA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On October 5, 2019 11:19:41 AM PDT, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp=2Ecom> wrote: >On Sat, Oct 5, 2019, 11:34 AM Shawn Webb <shawn=2Ewebb@hardenedbsd=2Eorg> >wrote: > >> On Sat, Oct 05, 2019 at 09:28:53AM -0600, Warner Losh wrote: >> > For a variety of reasons, the time has come to change the default >code >> > generation arch from i486 to i686 on our i386 port=2E No actual code >> removal >> > is planned as part of this effort=2E Only the default is doing >changed for >> > clang=2E >> > >> > The practical upshot of this for our i386 users will be zero for >almost >> > everybody=2E For the tiny sliver of people planning to deploy FreeBSD >on a >> > i486 or i586 core, a simple addition of CPUTYPE=3Dxxxx to >/etc/make=2Econf is >> > all that is needed for the src side of things=2E They will need to >setup >> > their own poudriere instance and create their own pkg repo to build >> > whatever packages are required for their deployment=2E >> > >> > It's my belief that even in the trailing edge long tail embedded >> deployment >> > segment of our user base this will cause no issues=2E All deployments >there >> > I'm aware of have moved of i486 class CPUs and the one 586 class >core >> > deployment I know of has no plans to update that to FreeBSD 11, let >alone >> > newer=2E >> > >> > There are a number of advantages to doing this which have been >> articulated >> > at length in other discussions=2E Briefly we get better code >generation for >> > CPUs people use and we avoid some test failures in llvm 9=2E0 because >i486 >> > doesn't have 64-bot atomics=2E >> > >> > Comments? >> >> Full disclosure: I personally don't care about 32-bit architectures=2E >> Feel free to ignore me based on that=2E ;-) >> >> I'm curious about the possibilities regarding 64-bit time_t on 32-bit >> Intel systems=2E >> > >Beyond the scope of this discussion=2E However, feel free to start a >thread >on this=2E It's quite difficult to switch if you want binary compat=2E It >would >affect system calls on the upgrade path and is among the hardest types >to >change if you have any kind of legacy to support=2E=2E=2E > >Warner > > >Thanks, >> >> -- >> Shawn Webb >> Cofounder / Security Engineer >> HardenedBSD >> >> Tor-ified Signal: +1 443-546-8752 >> Tor+XMPP+OTR: lattera@is=2Ea=2Ehacker=2Esx >> GPG Key ID: 0xFF2E67A277F8E1FA >> GPG Key Fingerprint: D206 BB45 15E0 9C49 0CF9 3633 C85B 0AF8 AB23 >0FB2 >> >_______________________________________________ >freebsd-arch@freebsd=2Eorg mailing list >https://lists=2Efreebsd=2Eorg/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch >To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd=2Eorg" This is one of the two reasons I believe we should deprecate 32-bit=2E Eve= n supporting 32-bit compatibility long term is unsustainable=2E It is not w= orth the effort=2E Putting a stake in the ground to say we no longer support 32-bit after 203= 8 would be desirable=2E (Sooner the better though=2E) --=20 Pardon the typos and autocorrect, small keyboard in use=2E=20 Cy Schubert <Cy=2ESchubert@cschubert=2Ecom> FreeBSD UNIX: <cy@FreeBSD=2Eorg> Web: https://www=2EFreeBSD=2Eorg The need of the many outweighs the greed of the few=2E Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail=2E Please excuse my brevity=2E From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Sat Oct 5 22:50:38 2019 Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@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 B51D113E9A0 for <freebsd-arch@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org>; Sat, 5 Oct 2019 22:50:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ian@freebsd.org) Received: from outbound3d.ore.mailhop.org (outbound3d.ore.mailhop.org [54.186.57.195]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46m25V0xMgz4DDn for <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>; Sat, 5 Oct 2019 22:50:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ian@freebsd.org) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1570315836; cv=none; d=outbound.mailhop.org; s=arc-outbound20181012; b=L6fkPqz3COyWs6y0Ha1DLAiJqiP48+thEbPWukrWH1dLgtxOI9xRDY4eMTsGi6nPOlObd5MBYqk5M gEg5tD+YiSQWpplrmonxsbOqtMqaNyM26BwS0U/olpZqudxBHkUAc07f9kBeL4l+dA1BoxX6B6kQXv gi2Y9FX3A5dbG1opurXLnBUhDkJc5upjNMbL98BH9c1oCtYAIBwhLpsjECV/yYNZvgqUe1DgfuWJ77 nRG1Zt9acPBDQyzW6mNQQkNuSe6g/E/kCERcm3yxFBjDfzY3h2x+GDAPIXcnKcNsLInrmriTzfNZxy 2vrXjf28IVfHYU/jmfHD/QaEnpR+MaQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=outbound.mailhop.org; s=arc-outbound20181012; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:content-type:references:in-reply-to: date:to:from:subject:message-id:dkim-signature:from; bh=9XtkUVKsPlMwl+oOmEOHQSRn02jPyXs7RhEDFwPnPF8=; b=BOMWbChfJAa1EIrCE6zvI1ag5bnjKFi32Irrf9IPWnswSNj7ULKuhuMeGvHWCSz9je0NTPqh46SnD fF/ZIu4+Q5Eb+Zgnp0cWX1xaVryuqO+/IVTGSO0YmXWV7GyjTsMKsebzVVqGWbXHcvaREg55dbyqlf E9phUSAfXOV9EYwsISrqHrc2Th+CRybcJ8bRXLpvtQzJ5bnJJNNRnr2TuVta8atSF6ZRqWMMi/ZXJu ExbqNxAz21/C60lr8Ifb30EgYDEDl32O4n5QAeIDLFNeWGSManQrWRdmtg1sIuWwwRMKPMebDa0/R5 KeSwUjxgPIer2YFoRKdnZgMmYK2zhdA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; outbound3.ore.mailhop.org; spf=softfail smtp.mailfrom=freebsd.org smtp.remote-ip=67.177.211.60; dmarc=none header.from=freebsd.org; arc=none header.oldest-pass=0; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=outbound.mailhop.org; s=dkim-high; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:content-type:references:in-reply-to: date:to:from:subject:message-id:from; bh=9XtkUVKsPlMwl+oOmEOHQSRn02jPyXs7RhEDFwPnPF8=; b=FdZZlZvclcrExB4f7V3yYN8N+Rqy74UzlX6SAx7/3KGlfIRbAyFfqddiI929PxHsBLMVdxlEAJcra DN+XL/8jaslKWLbwy/IaCMRR7vYAC8jFgT9+iuif+zKAVu1lpD261GKQ0gAKtu5ySfTggFpJNmE8Pj ZQbmwuOMkTSbge4kA97yJqP2rNThnhXE078c3Eb+Xw8XFJ0VlfjayBnS3x97zakuijJagvrvfRQ4mo 5L6Vy1n7PQ15D2oELiSKY5aGvSzu9grMGRjoSN1QBC5bpY7f+k1BJi2VucGqhPoJjwQQinwXTQLRjS JNN9U9X9UzHsINK5NnsBZQ6E9XpsytQ== X-MHO-RoutePath: aGlwcGll X-MHO-User: 8953bd45-e7c2-11e9-955f-dfabc1efb494 X-Report-Abuse-To: https://support.duocircle.com/support/solutions/articles/5000540958-duocircle-standard-smtp-abuse-information X-Originating-IP: 67.177.211.60 X-Mail-Handler: DuoCircle Outbound SMTP Received: from ilsoft.org (unknown [67.177.211.60]) by outbound3.ore.mailhop.org (Halon) with ESMTPSA id 8953bd45-e7c2-11e9-955f-dfabc1efb494; Sat, 05 Oct 2019 22:50:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from rev (rev [172.22.42.240]) by ilsoft.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x95MoWM5072982; Sat, 5 Oct 2019 16:50:32 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from ian@freebsd.org) Message-ID: <20f9896361c341736c5154c010cedf3fdcffc235.camel@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: New CPUTYPE default for i386 port From: Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org> To: Cy Schubert <Cy.schubert@cschubert.com>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>, Shawn Webb <shawn.webb@hardenedbsd.org> Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2019 16:50:32 -0600 In-Reply-To: <06E29438-732D-4045-8FB3-5F2A082E9B98@cschubert.com> References: <CANCZdfoFPsjyuCTfm0dQhz+sgVHLEvMA8-E3-Yhciz67qdoKvw@mail.gmail.com> <20191005173411.l6gs3kszs7zcgfey@mutt-hbsd> <CANCZdfo6=r7BaGA8qKYSR9ba=azzxD+yDkN4aO87Oj1Qr9TKmA@mail.gmail.com> <06E29438-732D-4045-8FB3-5F2A082E9B98@cschubert.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5 FreeBSD GNOME Team Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46m25V0xMgz4DDn X-Spamd-Bar: - Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-1.97 / 15.00]; local_wl_from(0.00)[freebsd.org]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.97)[-0.966,0]; ASN(0.00)[asn:16509, ipnet:54.186.0.0/15, country:US]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0] X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-arch>, <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/>; List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>, <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2019 22:50:38 -0000 On Sat, 2019-10-05 at 14:20 -0700, Cy Schubert wrote: > On October 5, 2019 11:19:41 AM PDT, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> > wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 5, 2019, 11:34 AM Shawn Webb < > > shawn.webb@hardenedbsd.org> > > wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Oct 05, 2019 at 09:28:53AM -0600, Warner Losh wrote: > > > > [...] > > > I'm curious about the possibilities regarding 64-bit time_t on > > > 32-bit > > > Intel systems. > > > > > > > Beyond the scope of this discussion. However, feel free to start a > > thread on this. It's quite difficult to switch if you want binary > > compat. It would affect system calls on the upgrade path and is > > among the hardest types to change if you have any kind of legacy to > > support... > > > > Warner > > > > > > This is one of the two reasons I believe we should deprecate 32-bit. > Even supporting 32-bit compatibility long term is unsustainable. It > is not worth the effort. > > Putting a stake in the ground to say we no longer support 32-bit > after 2038 would be desirable. (Sooner the better though.) > > Only i386 has a 32-bit time_t. Other 32-bit arches either began life with 64-bit time_t or have been switched to it. For i386, if its current users (and I am one, for $work) have a choice between "As of date X there will be no more i386" and "As of date X we switch time_t to 64 bits and you will not be able to run old binaries after that" I suspect people would choose the latter. -- Ian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?06E29438-732D-4045-8FB3-5F2A082E9B98>