Re: FreeBSD 11.3 or 12.x on IBM 9115-505

Mark Millard via freebsd-ppc <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.os.freebsd.devel.ppc
Message-ID <[email protected]>

On 2019-Oct-24, at 16:23, Mark Linimon <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 12:11:41PM +0000, Phil Scarr via freebsd-ppc wrote:
>> I'm disappointed that TeamLinux is so much further ahead than TeamBSD
>> on this, but given the relative marketshare of each team, I can't say
>> I'm surprised.  :-(
> 
> It's more that there are not a lot of these machines are in private
> hands, compared to the older Macs and newer IBMs and especially the
> Taloses.  My tests with Debian showed problems when I tried it several
> years ago (just as a "does this box work" test).
> 
> AFAIK within FreeBSD we had a maximum of 3 people with IBM Power5s.
> 

I had a vague memory that C++'s investigation for its memory model
included power/powerpc and power5/5+ ended up special. Looking
around shows "ISO/IEC JTC1 SC22 WG21 N2745" was revised to say:

"Finally, applications that need to use C/C++ sequentially consistent atomic operations on Power 5/5+ must adhere to the rules set out separately."

with those rules being listed separately in:

http://www.rdrop.com/users/paulmck/scalability/paper/N2745rP5.2010.02.19a.html

Looks like power5/5+ was a bit of an odd ball compared to the
others.

===
Mark Millard
marklmi at yahoo.com
( dsl-only.net went
away in early 2018-Mar)

_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ppc
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.