Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 11 May 2011 00:21:24 +0200
From:      Marius Strobl <marius@alchemy.franken.de>
To:        Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-sun4v@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Dropping sun4v as a platform
Message-ID:  <20110510222124.GA35687@alchemy.franken.de>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimUpeESJcHN75Vd=gZdXZzA5QPz-g@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <BANLkTimUpeESJcHN75Vd=gZdXZzA5QPz-g@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 11:35:21AM -0400, Attilio Rao wrote:
> I tried to look to a previous discussion on this and I failed to
> locate one, thus let me raise the point here.
> 
> As I'm working on on largeSMP support, I was wondering how much sense
> makes to fixing sun4v for this.
> Besides having 'tinderbox/universe' working, not so much it seems.
> The code is pretty much rotting and marius@ said explicitely that an
> effective effort on that platform should probabilly be more similar to
> what OpenBSD does with it.

Actually I just said that there should be a combined sun4u+sun4v
codebase like both Linux and OpenBSD have in order to reduce
duplicated code and to ease maintenance. I didn't imply one of
them has superior support for sun4v that we could lift or some
such.

> He also is in favor of dropping the support
> entirely, right now.

No, I just said I'm not against dropping it, nothing more. 

Marius




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110510222124.GA35687>