From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DBF26C64EC7 for ; Tue, 28 Feb 2023 10:40:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pWxOn-0008Fd-Ib; Tue, 28 Feb 2023 05:39:59 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pWxOg-0008AH-I8 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Feb 2023 05:39:51 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.129.124]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pWxOc-0001jW-Fl for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Feb 2023 05:39:50 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1677580785; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=NJr1v+Fg3X7rjMTnlf2Bt1V+Ic/mzwck/Xt/BL3vIn0=; b=cijT/e+3xZ3lTiNxfmvQZjdIC/q7uuhlMhJZ7clSjoMRUaItlVTUXbkwfHp/N9Cu3PfTNW PkKIfaARYi2eeUrIydFuZOzWb5edBAXAAkbeNzELnrvsd+OAyjmMZnWCq/dQLrhuWqEqU2 12fjMmuZ8uDfD6+ZdezVPSQo2//Gq84= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mx3-rdu2.redhat.com [66.187.233.73]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-329-lf9JwHrrNxiA7gTzVlLOEg-1; Tue, 28 Feb 2023 05:39:42 -0500 X-MC-Unique: lf9JwHrrNxiA7gTzVlLOEg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D422A293248C; Tue, 28 Feb 2023 10:39:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blackfin.pond.sub.org (unknown [10.39.193.92]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 91E7E2026D68; Tue, 28 Feb 2023 10:39:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: by blackfin.pond.sub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7BCBB21E6A1F; Tue, 28 Feb 2023 11:39:39 +0100 (CET) From: Markus Armbruster To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Cc: Daniel P. =?utf-8?Q?Berrang=C3=A9?= , Thomas Huth , Peter Maydell , libvir-list@redhat.com, Richard Henderson , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-arm@nongnu.org, Reinoud Zandijk , Marcel Apfelbaum , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Paolo Bonzini , Maxim Levitsky , Alex =?utf-8?Q?Benn=C3=A9e?= Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] docs/about: Deprecate 32-bit x86 hosts and qemu-system-i386 References: <20230227111050.54083-1-thuth@redhat.com> <20230227111050.54083-2-thuth@redhat.com> <20230227150858-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <84d7d3e5-0da2-7506-44a7-047ebfcfc4da@redhat.com> <20230228031026-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20230228040115-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20230228050908-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2023 11:39:39 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20230228050908-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> (Michael S. Tsirkin's message of "Tue, 28 Feb 2023 05:11:20 -0500") Message-ID: <87cz5uhy50.fsf@pond.sub.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.4 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.129.124; envelope-from=armbru@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org "Michael S. Tsirkin" writes: > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 09:40:49AM +0000, Daniel P. Berrang=C3=A9 wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 10:14:52AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: >> > On 28/02/2023 10.03, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 08:59:52AM +0000, Daniel P. Berrang=C3=A9 wr= ote: >> > > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 03:19:20AM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> > > > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 08:49:09AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: >> > > > > > On 27/02/2023 21.12, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 11:50:07AM +0000, Daniel P. Berrang= =C3=A9 wrote: >> > > > > > > > I feel like we should have separate deprecation entries fo= r the >> > > > > > > > i686 host support, and for qemu-system-i386 emulator binar= y, as >> > > > > > > > although they're related they are independant features with >> > > > > > > > differing impact. eg removing qemu-system-i386 affects all >> > > > > > > > host architectures, not merely 32-bit x86 host, so I think= we >> > > > > > > > can explain the impact more clearly if we separate them. >> > > > > > >=20 >> > > > > > > Removing qemu-system-i386 seems ok to me - I think qemu-syst= em-x86_64 is >> > > > > > > a superset. >> > > > > > >=20 >> > > > > > > Removing support for building on 32 bit systems seems like a= pity - it's >> > > > > > > one of a small number of ways to run 64 bit binaries on 32 b= it systems, >> > > > > > > and the maintainance overhead is quite small. >> > > > > >=20 >> > > > > > Note: We're talking about 32-bit *x86* hosts here. Do you real= ly think that >> > > > > > someone is still using QEMU usermode emulation >> > > > > > to run 64-bit binaries on a 32-bit x86 host?? ... If so, I'd b= e very surprised! >> > > > >=20 >> > > > > I don't know - why x86 specifically? One can build a 32 bit bina= ry on any host. >> > > > > I think 32 bit x86 environments are just more common in the clou= d. >> > > >=20 >> > > > Can you point to anything that backs up that assertion. Clouds I've >> > > > seen always give you a 64-bit environment, and many OS no longer >> > > > even ship 32-bit installable media. >> > >=20 >> > > Sorry about being unclear. I meant that it seems easier to run CI in= the >> > > cloud in a 32 bit x64 environment than get a 32 bit ARM environment. >> >=20 >> > It's still doable ... but for how much longer? We're currently dependi= ng on >> > Fedora, but they also slowly drop more and more support for this >> > environment, see e.g.: >>=20 >> FWIW, we should cull our fedora-i386-cross.docker dockerfile and >> replace it with a debian i686 dockerfile generated by lcitool. >> There's no compelling reason why i686 should be different from >> all our other cross builds which are based on Debian. The Debian >> lcitool generated container would have access to a wider range >> of deps than our hand written Fedora one. >>=20 >> > https://www.theregister.com/2022/03/10/fedora_inches_closer_to_droppi= ng/ >>=20 >> With regards, >> Daniel > > ... and is closer to where 32 bit is likely to be deployed which is > systems like e.g. raspberry pi os which until recently was only > 32 bit. 32 bit ARM. How is that an argument for continued maintenance of 32 bit x86? If the argument goes like "32 bit x86 is easier to test in CI", then I don't buy it. Testing 64 bit ARM + 32 bit x86 does not magically replace testing 32 bit ARM. The question to answer: Is 32 bit x86 worth its upkeep? Two sub-questions: 1. Is it worth the human attention? 2. Is it worth (scarce!) CI minutes? I want to see an argument for benefits justifying the costs. A benefit like "somebody out there might still want to use it" I'd value at zero.