On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 12:14 PM Ian Lepore <ian_at_freebsd.org> wrote: > On Thu, 2019-02-28 at 11:06 -0800, Conrad Meyer wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 10:32 AM Steve Kargl > > <sgk_at_troutmask.apl.washington.edu> wrote: > > > This is interesting as well. Does this mean that amd64 is now > > > the only tier 1 platform and all other architectures are after > > > thoughts? > > > > This has been the de facto truth for years. i386 is mostly only > > supported by virtue of sharing code with amd64. There are efforts to > > promote arm64 to Tier 1, but it isn't there yet. Power8+ might be > > another good alternative Tier 1 candidate eventually. None have > > anything like the developer popularity that amd64 enjoys. > > > > > > I have been of the opinion that armv[67] has met all the bullet points > to be a tier-1 arch for several years, but nobody seemed interested in > declaring it so. I concur that armv[67] is the closest thing we have to a second tier 1. arm64 is also quite good, but still has a few more rough edges compared to armv[67]. > Now it'll never happen, because there seems to be > growing momentum to throw everything 32-bit under the bus and declare > freebsd to be a 64-bit-only OS. Netflix wins; those of us building > smaller embedded products will eventually be forced to move to linux. > While there's been some talk, there's too many relevant 32-bit arm chips to toss it out in 13 (planned in 2ish years or 2021) and no i386 in 13 likely would be a stretch as well, so 13 almost certainly will have 32-bit kernels and userland support (though that will require the 32-bit processors support 64-bit atomics to reduce friction). Who know if that will be the case in 4 or 5 years when 14 is branched (so ~2025). Current trends suggest that 32-bits might not be relevant then, but we certainly can't say that for sure today. WarnerReceived on Thu Feb 28 2019 - 21:55:02 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:41:20 UTC