[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: dropping 32-bit host support

From: Thomas Huth
Subject: Re: dropping 32-bit host support
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2023 12:02:33 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.13.0

On 16/03/2023 11.22, Andrew Randrianasulu wrote:

чт, 16 мар. 2023 г., 12:17 Andrew Randrianasulu <randrianasulu@gmail.com <mailto:randrianasulu@gmail.com>>:

    чт, 16 мар. 2023 г., 11:31 Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com

        On 16/03/2023 08.36, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
         > On 16/3/23 08:17, Andrew Randrianasulu wrote:
         >> чт, 16 мар. 2023 г., 10:05 Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
        <philmd@linaro.org <mailto:philmd@linaro.org>
         >> <mailto:philmd@linaro.org <mailto:philmd@linaro.org>>>:
         >>     Hi Andrew,
         >>     On 16/3/23 01:57, Andrew Randrianasulu wrote:
         >>      > Looking at https://wiki.qemu.org/ChangeLog/8.0
         >>     <https://wiki.qemu.org/ChangeLog/8.0
         >>      > <https://wiki.qemu.org/ChangeLog/8.0
         >>     <https://wiki.qemu.org/ChangeLog/8.0
         >>      >
         >>      > ===
         >>      > System emulation on 32-bit x86 and ARM hosts has been
         >>     The
         >>      > QEMU project no longer considers 32-bit x86 and ARM
        support for
         >>     system
         >>      > emulation to be an effective use of its limited
        resources, and thus
         >>      > intends to discontinue.
         >>      >
         >>      >   ==
         >>      >
         >>      > well, I guess arguing from memory-consuption point on 32
        bit x86
         >>     hosts
         >>      > (like my machine where I run 32 bit userspace on 64 bit

        All current PCs have multiple gigabytes of RAM, so using a 32-bit
        to save some few bytes sounds weird.

    I think difference more like in 20-30% (on disk and in ram), not *few

I stand (self) corrected on *on disk* binary size, this parameter tend to be ~same between bash / php binaries from Slackware 15.0 i586/x86_64. I do not have full identical x64 Slackware setup for measuring memory impact.

Still, pushing users into endless hw upgrade is no fun:


note e-waste and energy consumption

Now you're mixing things quite badly. That would be an argument in the years before 2010 maybe, when not everybody had a 64-bit processor in their PC yet, but it's been now more than 12 years that all recent Desktop processors feature 64-bit mode. So if QEMU stops supporting 32-bit x86 environments, this is not forcing you to buy a new hardware, since you're having a 64-bit hardware already anyway. If someone still has plain 32-bit x86 hardware around for their daily use, that's certainly not a piece of hardware you want to run QEMU on, since it's older than 12 years already, and thus not really strong enough to run a recent emulator in a recent way.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]