Re: [PATCH 0/1] meson: Deprecate 32-bit host systems

[Richard Henderson]

On 1/29/25 04:47, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> The difference with TCG of course is that TCG is in active development, and therefore its 
> 32-bit host support is not surviving passively in the same way that a random device is.  
> Still, I think we can identify at least three different parts that should be treated 
> differently: 64-on-32, 32-on-32 system-mode emulation and 32-on-32 user-mode emulation.

Why the user/system split for 32-on-32?

> We could and should remove 64-on-32, maybe even without a deprecation period, but the rest 
> I'm not so sure.  I don't know enough to understand their maintenance cost (other than the 
> mere existence of the 32-bit TCG backends), but it's certainly not comparable to 64-on-32.

Ok, lemme see how easy it is to prohibit configuring 64-on-32.

But I also think we should still deprecate 32-bit hosts, sooner rather than later.  Even 
if we have no immediate plans to remove them.  I think we want interested parties to speak 
up.  At some point this decade I want to be able to say: we've given you fair warning and 
time is up.


r~