From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A25236607C for ; Mon, 1 Jun 2026 21:26:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1780349205; cv=none; b=FwvRNijiZveQ5o5OWIX4lHlOTvDhx7tq8Ys+NIzJg141ufmoN+UuwEk2ARbhkGhI+vj9lnfV0nE0xkSvY1hNU3TQoVYdSe5jRDdZ+xqvYBTGePhmFJd1YsDZDDyNSUpWOPc/XIJLvLgJXwuOjZGMD9IoT0lXiF+2c4N3FsaLMQY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1780349205; c=relaxed/simple; bh=dsW63O8F12N1z/KUZa9rspIm7tABniYUT0N1GaBPZ1I=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=b6eEdmwFnOruMVj8NKAowWfqLndwqFWJufSU7Od7xeobkj2jRE4s5bPi9nzSOCJjpBzaBe3ydoARQ79qftcWw7QfZebnLRg50CgDbmtTHcjGrb2AhEWYmFAW3mS8N9X+U9dYoFc4iXZAyxkjxZ86zJg/ZlbDCi7hxVU3tc8SPww= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=OEKFi5Vs; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=rjcmOdnd; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="OEKFi5Vs"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="rjcmOdnd" Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2026 23:26:41 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1780349202; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=214rRpll3Ayn3t9wU0sqRxl5cGRRtb0I0LYGvxeZzRM=; b=OEKFi5Vsm2W21GDb6E22Fl899jsD4w9nyx/MMZXBiTCg7BpXEH7nm7LuGShfngPa+5wa1F 4QRkhdE7t4fszAcabLq03pz18QBa62nP83fW8f2vm70CQn9FMFdBIdQ74jlCxzlA0Dncyr HjXO8SWsunwJOQ1PFC8Ljf8LSUNgTXFXNbxlI36DvKhBGN4snfWZN6c4KvXlwAWImYdfo/ ygqGs0/C/zci797sH3ngCu6XbOoXXg4Gf/PMiXjKqCefOXtlGOt/XmVOZMrlfX4q+XeZyF JnqJs60eR80DJSJhH3/uwtQ1VVxvHKtO215mhx4HtLRW2qZW4x4O3FkIJt6NZA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1780349202; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=214rRpll3Ayn3t9wU0sqRxl5cGRRtb0I0LYGvxeZzRM=; b=rjcmOdnd0SKWAOUGqCCb3fjwdHp3Z+1iGm41iWWzWYGGGXDwzNtG9ako8KUg39fBHT38QB 6ZolusRtFdhyC7Cg== From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior To: Tomas Glozar Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, "H . Peter Anvin" , Borislav Petkov , Dave Hansen , Ingo Molnar , Jonathan Corbet , Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Start removing X86_X32_ABI Message-ID: <20260601212641.3OMNe1Gi@linutronix.de> References: <20260523093734.A3AR7reJ@linutronix.de> <20260528070548.2967334-1-tglozar@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260528070548.2967334-1-tglozar@kernel.org> On 2026-05-28 09:05:48 [+0200], Tomas Glozar wrote: > FWIW, T2 Linux [1] also has an option to build x32, and there have been such > builds last year [2]. Since this year, it switched to building KDE Plasma > desktop ISOs, where x32 makes less sense, though, as modern desktop is rather > RAM-hungry. I wasn't aware of this. If an application, such as chromium, is memory hungry the x32 doesn't help much to contain it. Your pointer are smaller, granted, but the overall memory consumption is still significant. Running x32 means also that a single application is not able to use more than 4GiB or memory. > [1] https://t2linux.com > [2] https://dl.t2sde.org/binary/2025/t2-25.10-x32-base-wayland-glibc-gcc-nocona.iso > > Also at least 6 years ago, x32 was reported there to increase performance by > some 5-8% [3] likely thanks to smaller pointers allowing better cache > utilization. That is not insignificant, and not all tasks require gigabytes of > RAM (e.g. compression and encryption, as shown in the link). Arnd told me quite some time ago that cross compiling (or compiling in general) has better performance on x32 than x86-64. This was the only case afaik. > [3] https://www.youtube.com/live/Mw-ravkg67k?si=HS7ZHZyg_FKXPZUz&t=387 (yeah > YouTube video not the best source...) So from that linked video, there few cases where x32 builds quicker. But then at 9.51 there is runtime x64-O2 is leading. The video is titled 5%-8% but I don't see where this is from. > Tomas Sebastian