-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 04:42:02 +0000 annathemerm...@hush.com wrote: >On 31 May 2011 19:51, Otto Moerbeek <o...@drijf.net> wrote: >> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 07:23:46PM +0000, Christian Weisgerber >wrote: >> >>> Marc Espie <es...@nerim.net> wrote: >>> >>> > Not surprisingly, a lot of software that claims to be 64 bits- > >ready isn't. >>> > This touches all web navigators, most jit engines, and >probably lots more >>> > of software (our ports tree version of gnu-grep, for >instance). >>> >>> I don't think a lot suffers from it, but some prominent cases >do. >>> Three problems have been mentioned: >>> >>> (1) Truncation of pointers to 32 bits. Our malloc(3) has >returned >>> addresses >4 GB for some time now on amd64 (and before that >on >>> other archs like alpha), so I don't expect any new fallout >>> there. I seem to remember that we had a rash of ports >fixes >>> back when this first happened on amd64. >>> >>> (2) Tagged pointers. A tagged pointer is when you "know" that >not >>> all the bits in a pointer are used to generate an address >and >>> you squeeze some other data into the "spare" bits. This >blocks >>> newer versions of Firefox on sparc64. Mozilla's new >JavaScript >>> engine uses tagged pointers and those "unused" address bits >on >>> x86 are actually used on sparc64. >>> >>> (3) The expectation that, no matter what their absolute >address, >the >>> relative offsets between all your pieces of data fit into >32 >>> bits, i.e., all data is within a 4 GB window. That sounds >like >>> a bizarre requirement, but apparently some JIT engines are >>> "optimized" to rely on this. These are the cases that >break >>> with new vmmap. >> >> The smart programmers "solve" number (3) by allocating 2G of >memory in >> advance to store their jit compiled code, so their code can use >32 bit >> relative offsets. They say, hey, it's only virtual memory, so it >> doesn't take much resources. Often that is true and it seems a >smart >> idea, but it has the consequence that you lose randomization and >> protected memory with page size granularity. Or you are forced >to >do >> all the memory mangement on your own, basically rewriting the >memory >> management part of the OS in your browser. Suddenly the smart >idea >> does not sound so smart anymore. >> >> -Otto >> >>> >>> But, hey, 64-bit desktop machines have only been around since >1993 >>> or so, and I guess some of the Mozilla programmers weren't born >yet >>> when we watched oh-so-clever tagged pointer use blow up at, >say, >>> the Motorola 68000 to 68020 transition some 25 years ago. >>> >>> -- >>> Christian "naddy" Weisgerber >na...@mips.inka.de > >Great. Just absolutely fantastic. These people come up with more >and more resource intensive ways of doing the same old computing >tasks we've been able to do for a decade or more so that the rest >of us have to buy newer, fancier, more expensive machines to do >the >same things we've been able to do for a decade or more. > >Of course, for a significant portion of the population, "high >performance computing" means "a computer I can access from the >convenience of my home, rather than having to spend an hour >walking >to the library and an hour walking back just so I can sign up and >wait an hour or two for the chance to use it for 30 minutes and >then rush to do the important things, like fill out job >applications for blue collar positions for companies who can't be >bothered to take paper applications or check to see if I have any >important business e-mail from people who are too annoying to send >old-fashioned snail mail". > >For a lot of people, a computer is like a glorified communications >device and typewriter. Except a whole lot more expensive. > >Hence the usefulness of old computers. When everyone else is >rushing to get the latest and greatest, it's often possible to get >a sufficiently aged computer for very cheap or even free. > >Of course, the big corporations don't make as much money if people >do that. Which probably explains at least some of the bad >software. >If we make this new software resource intensive and inefficient >enough, then people will have to buy newer, more expensive >computers in order to run it. But the older software works just >fine? Then we'll just have to stop releasing security patches for >it. Good thing we didn't write solid, secure code to begin with. >Now the hackers (or crackers, or whatever the correct term is) out >there will force the laggards to upgrade to newer more expensive >hardware than runs newer more expensive more inefficient software >than we still support, and the computer industry goes on! Yay >hackers! > >Well, I can understand that line from corporations looking to earn >money, but it makes less sense to hear it from not-for-profits >like >Linux or Firefox. > >They say we should all upgrade our computers after three years, >five years if we want to push it. What they seem to have missed is >that it is a recession. A really bad recession. Goodbye art shows! >Hello tent cities! Welcome to the most dangerous town in >California: stop laying off cops! And that sort of thing.... In >other words, lots of people have better things to do with their >money than follow the mainstream line about upgrading their >hardware. Things like trying to pay the rent, heat the home at >least enough to stop the pipes bursting in the winter (could be >hard if there's a gas shortage), or, at the very least, pay the >grocery bill. Oh, and medical bills. Illnesses and disabilities >don't care about recessions. They'll hurt you whether you can >afford treatment or not, and of course, insurance companies are >even more useless during recessions than they normally are, if >there's any room for them to be more useless... so if you have a >serious condition, running the latest version of Microsoft Office >probably isn't on top of your To-Do list. > >There's no reason a Pentium II or an m68k can't browse the >internet, use e-mail, file online applications, and do word >processing. Then can even not-so-important things like play music >and videos and a few games that don't go overboard on the >graphics. >They could when they first came out. Oh, wait, the internet isn't >the same as it was when they first came out. Really, much >burdensome code does a website need just to give me basic e-mail >access or display a text article? I shouldn't even need JavaScript >to read a text article. Webmail and text articles aren't state-of- >the-art-technology, and they really don't need fancy, state-of-the- > >art-of-inefficiency code. > >I really think Firebird was the height of graphical internet >browsing. Konqueror 3.x isn't bad either. Of course, these days, >to >access most of the web without too much JavaScript pain, you >either >need Firefox + NoScript or something similar, or one JavaScript >enabled browser and one JavaScript-free one. > >And don't even get me started on Flash. > >I really, really appreciate OpenBSD's excellent support for older >hardware. It's quite refreshing to use a modern operating system >that takes support for computers like this here powerpc iBook G3 >seriously. NetBSD too. (NetBSD's installer did not work as well as >OpenBSD's, but they made up for it with really good documentation. >Don't get me started on Linux. Debian Linux's installer was a >disgrace.) > >Of course, Firefox is still driving me nuts, but I suppose it or >its competitors are going to do that no matter what operating >system I run. The whole internet is driving me nuts. Too much >JavaScript for silly features! And don't even get me started on >Flash websites. I can understand a flash application or a flash >video, but your entire menu and text content don't need to be >embedded in flash! > >Thanks for letting us know just how horrible many applications' >efficiency on amd64 is. It certainly helps make me feel less left >behind here on my 900mHz powerpc. It was a state-of-the-art >computer as recently as 2003. No reason it shouldn't be able to do >loads of awesome things. > >I say leave the upgrade fever to the people who actually care >about >things like fancy 3D graphics games or state-of-the-art movie >editing or things like that which actually should be resource >intensive. Most people can get on fine without.
Although I think OpenBSD and NetBSD often offer better support for old hardware than Linux (or at least, they do on powerpc), the point here is still basically the same as mine: http://mobile.osnews.com/story.php/23451/Smart-Reuse-with-Open- Source-Linux-Goes-Green/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Charset: UTF8 Version: Hush 3.0 Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify wsBcBAEBAgAGBQJN5lexAAoJEKlMTST7VF+oehoH/AvyPZDWCp6gInlg8j1XmbYEe0e+ OMn8vCAQspoRDC7rJ9C5a0SSNhkN7mgRdki019mmYiqQd9XX/iywJWXrkf7P4rX83wVm jwUaLy825mzo1IFQhQeqdJXuD3psKyc2J6zl/JybCkClZiU5m4o3m0/t2GPPEClSLN1E nwORYJw6rg0Xllv3c+3UIWWnYRdA23VyIs4f4Dm5E3P55fWR6jiDD3izpCCP6REa2bnj 8JNj8keBzg8PjbpaeJb7wFOeeTZgjnUFgxtl6Wofhqf4SVhQkbUwIz6ebSoPidNhV9M8 ywR2JcuVNoaHjOiilJK53xSOCARfaK+wh6uIF3TThIs= =GYOd -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
