Originally posted by birdie
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
RHEL9 Likely To Drop Older x86_64 CPUs, Fedora Can Better Prepare With "Enterprise Linux Next"
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by M@GOid View PostMy tough exactly. Impressive how chill the comments are overhaul. If it was Canonical, people had already ripped their panties and called Shuttleworth the antichrist.
Comment
-
Originally posted by skeevy420 View PostI think the cutoff should be AES support -- one generation before AVX (using Intel as the metric) which means anything from around 2010+ should be good enough.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
That kind of stinks.
I have a dual Xeon workstation that belongs to the Ivy Bridge era. It still runs rings around today's consumer hardware by virtue of its 192GB memory and dual processor setup, and is only beaten by the Core X and Threadripper HEDT families.
In addition, I have three low-cost Apollo Lake and Gemini Lake laptops that I bought from China at extremely low prices, and I fully intend to get a few more as spares due to their prices. They are excellent for daily computing such as email, writing, light Wiresharking / TCPdump and Chrome Remote Desktop (only for controlling another person's computer, not the other way round since it does not work on Wayland). And both Lakes do not have AVX. Those laptops are currently running Debian 10 on Wayland/
If Fedora is going to mandate AVX or AVX2 it's going to cut out a whole bunch of hardware that is fully capable of running a modern Linux distribution without performance issues. Especially on my dual Xeon.
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Originally posted by edwaleni View PostVMWare has already sunsetted anything prior to 2010 (Westmere) due to missing instructions for virtualization. I wonder how much virtio stuff for KVM can be taken out for anything less than IvyBridge or Opteron Bulldozer.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by pal666 View Postthis circus of chasing slighly less ancient hardware is such a waste of resources. one would think redhat has engineers who are able to defer binding of codegen options to host cpu to install time or run time
Supporting a forest of them could be an even bigger waste of resources because compiling, storing, and sending countless variations on the same binary isn't free.
Though, to be fair to you, you did just basically argue for compiling the entire OS to WebAssembly, so it's not 100% out of the question.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ssokolow View PostLet's assume that companies were willing to run "Gentoo, but with a Red Hat support contract behind it", including all the "wait for it to compile at install time"
Originally posted by ssokolow View Postand "QA combinatorial explosion" implications of that.
Originally posted by ssokolow View PostSupporting a forest of them could be an even bigger waste of resources because compiling, storing, and sending countless variations on the same binary isn't free.
Originally posted by ssokolow View PostThough, to be fair to you, you did just basically argue for compiling the entire OS to WebAssembly, so it's not 100% out of the question.
Comment
-
Originally posted by pal666 View Posti never said "compiled at install time". i said "bound"(options to arch), leaving mechanism unspecified. one way is to download relevant build
Originally posted by pal666 View Postfirst, with working compiler result should be identical.
Originally posted by pal666 View Postsecond, they can easily designate some variant as primary and others as "use at your own risk(or pay for it)".
Originally posted by pal666 View Postcompiling is essentially free(it's done once per millions of downloads). storage is cheap and sending doesn't depend on number of variants. and nothing demands "countless" variants, any number greater than 1 is better than 1
Originally posted by pal666 View Postno, i didn't argue for that. it can be used as implementation, but i'm afraid quality of implementation would siffer. same reason why jit sucks - (optimizing)compilation takes time
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sonadow View PostThat kind of stinks.
I have a dual Xeon workstation that belongs to the Ivy Bridge era. It still runs rings around today's consumer hardware by virtue of its 192GB memory and dual processor setup, and is only beaten by the Core X and Threadripper HEDT families.
In addition, I have three low-cost Apollo Lake and Gemini Lake laptops that I bought from China at extremely low prices, and I fully intend to get a few more as spares due to their prices. They are excellent for daily computing such as email, writing, light Wiresharking / TCPdump and Chrome Remote Desktop (only for controlling another person's computer, not the other way round since it does not work on Wayland). And both Lakes do not have AVX. Those laptops are currently running Debian 10 on Wayland/
If Fedora is going to mandate AVX or AVX2 it's going to cut out a whole bunch of hardware that is fully capable of running a modern Linux distribution without performance issues. Especially on my dual Xeon.
There's a reason I picked AES as the cutoff line -- it was the feature introduced with my processors
Comment
Comment