* [dpdk-dev] Retire x86 32 bit? @ 2018-04-17 18:31 Stephen Hemminger 2018-04-17 18:39 ` David Harton (dharton) 2018-04-17 20:40 ` Bruce Richardson 0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Stephen Hemminger @ 2018-04-17 18:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: dev I wonder if x86 32 bit is still useful? Many distributions no longer support it, and not sure if it is tested througly by anyone. Maybe time to deprecate it (gradually)? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] Retire x86 32 bit? 2018-04-17 18:31 [dpdk-dev] Retire x86 32 bit? Stephen Hemminger @ 2018-04-17 18:39 ` David Harton (dharton) 2018-04-17 20:01 ` Jim Murphy 2018-04-17 20:40 ` Bruce Richardson 1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: David Harton (dharton) @ 2018-04-17 18:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Stephen Hemminger, dev It is used and tested in production and non-production environments. Regards, Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: dev <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Stephen Hemminger > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 2:31 PM > To: dev@dpdk.org > Subject: [dpdk-dev] Retire x86 32 bit? > > I wonder if x86 32 bit is still useful? > Many distributions no longer support it, and not sure if it is tested > througly by anyone. > > Maybe time to deprecate it (gradually)? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] Retire x86 32 bit? 2018-04-17 18:39 ` David Harton (dharton) @ 2018-04-17 20:01 ` Jim Murphy 2018-04-17 20:46 ` Stephen Hemminger 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Jim Murphy @ 2018-04-17 20:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David Harton (dharton); +Cc: Stephen Hemminger, dev Still used in certain memory constrained environments. On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 11:39 AM, David Harton (dharton) <dharton@cisco.com> wrote: > It is used and tested in production and non-production environments. > > Regards, > Dave > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: dev <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Stephen Hemminger > > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 2:31 PM > > To: dev@dpdk.org > > Subject: [dpdk-dev] Retire x86 32 bit? > > > > I wonder if x86 32 bit is still useful? > > Many distributions no longer support it, and not sure if it is tested > > througly by anyone. > > > > Maybe time to deprecate it (gradually)? > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] Retire x86 32 bit? 2018-04-17 20:01 ` Jim Murphy @ 2018-04-17 20:46 ` Stephen Hemminger 2018-04-17 21:18 ` Roger B Melton 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Stephen Hemminger @ 2018-04-17 20:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jim Murphy; +Cc: David Harton (dharton), dev On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 13:01:14 -0700 Jim Murphy <jmurphy@arista.com> wrote: > Still used in certain memory constrained environments. > > > On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 11:39 AM, David Harton (dharton) <dharton@cisco.com> > wrote: > > > It is used and tested in production and non-production environments. > > > > Regards, > > Dave > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: dev <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Stephen Hemminger > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 2:31 PM > > > To: dev@dpdk.org > > > Subject: [dpdk-dev] Retire x86 32 bit? > > > > > > I wonder if x86 32 bit is still useful? > > > Many distributions no longer support it, and not sure if it is tested > > > througly by anyone. > > > > > > Maybe time to deprecate it (gradually)? > > Pure 32 bit, or x86-64 instructions and registers used in 32 bit mode (which can be faster). ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] Retire x86 32 bit? 2018-04-17 20:46 ` Stephen Hemminger @ 2018-04-17 21:18 ` Roger B Melton 2018-04-18 17:40 ` Jim Murphy 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Roger B Melton @ 2018-04-17 21:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Stephen Hemminger, Jim Murphy; +Cc: David Harton (dharton), dev On 4/17/18 4:46 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 13:01:14 -0700 > Jim Murphy <jmurphy@arista.com> wrote: > >> Still used in certain memory constrained environments. >> >> >> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 11:39 AM, David Harton (dharton) <dharton@cisco.com> >> wrote: >> >>> It is used and tested in production and non-production environments. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Dave >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: dev <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Stephen Hemminger >>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 2:31 PM >>>> To: dev@dpdk.org >>>> Subject: [dpdk-dev] Retire x86 32 bit? >>>> >>>> I wonder if x86 32 bit is still useful? >>>> Many distributions no longer support it, and not sure if it is tested >>>> througly by anyone. >>>> >>>> Maybe time to deprecate it (gradually)? >>> > Pure 32 bit, or x86-64 instructions and registers used in 32 bit mode (which can be faster). > . > Pure 32bit in our case. We do not use x32 ABI. -Roger ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] Retire x86 32 bit? 2018-04-17 21:18 ` Roger B Melton @ 2018-04-18 17:40 ` Jim Murphy 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Jim Murphy @ 2018-04-18 17:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Roger B Melton; +Cc: Stephen Hemminger, David Harton (dharton), dev Same for our case. On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 2:18 PM, Roger B Melton <rmelton@cisco.com> wrote: > On 4/17/18 4:46 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > >> On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 13:01:14 -0700 >> Jim Murphy <jmurphy@arista.com> wrote: >> >> Still used in certain memory constrained environments. >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 11:39 AM, David Harton (dharton) < >>> dharton@cisco.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> It is used and tested in production and non-production environments. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Dave >>>> >>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: dev <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Stephen Hemminger >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 2:31 PM >>>>> To: dev@dpdk.org >>>>> Subject: [dpdk-dev] Retire x86 32 bit? >>>>> >>>>> I wonder if x86 32 bit is still useful? >>>>> Many distributions no longer support it, and not sure if it is tested >>>>> througly by anyone. >>>>> >>>>> Maybe time to deprecate it (gradually)? >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> Pure 32 bit, or x86-64 instructions and registers used in 32 bit mode >> (which can be faster). >> . >> >> > Pure 32bit in our case. We do not use x32 ABI. > > -Roger > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] Retire x86 32 bit? 2018-04-17 18:31 [dpdk-dev] Retire x86 32 bit? Stephen Hemminger 2018-04-17 18:39 ` David Harton (dharton) @ 2018-04-17 20:40 ` Bruce Richardson 1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Bruce Richardson @ 2018-04-17 20:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Stephen Hemminger; +Cc: dev On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 06:31:07PM +0000, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > I wonder if x86 32 bit is still useful? > Many distributions no longer support it, and not sure if it is tested > througly by anyone. > > Maybe time to deprecate it (gradually)? Distributions no longer support it for the kernel, but they certainly still support running 32-bit apps. There's still a lot of code out there that has not been converted to 64-bit, and we need to keep 32-bit DPDK around to support that for some time. Regards, /Bruce ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2018-04-18 17:40 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2018-04-17 18:31 [dpdk-dev] Retire x86 32 bit? Stephen Hemminger 2018-04-17 18:39 ` David Harton (dharton) 2018-04-17 20:01 ` Jim Murphy 2018-04-17 20:46 ` Stephen Hemminger 2018-04-17 21:18 ` Roger B Melton 2018-04-18 17:40 ` Jim Murphy 2018-04-17 20:40 ` Bruce Richardson
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).