On Wed, 2012-05-16 at 21:37 +0200, drago01 wrote: > On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 9:33 PM, Alexander Larsson <alexl@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, 2012-05-16 at 15:30 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > >> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 04:28:31PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > >> > >> > Mhmm, so I was under the impression that x32 was mostly about increasing > >> > the scalability of virtualized systems. i.e. run a higher number of > >> > x32 containers/VM on an x86_64 host. Most server software that is run in > >> > containers/VMs does not require 64bit address space, and hence using x32 > >> > for them should be quite benificial so that you can run more > >> > containers/VMs per host. After all this would reduce memory and CPU > >> > consumption of each, and due to smaller memory usage also result in less > >> > IO? > >> > >> I was under the impression that it was to make Android work better on > >> Intel. Scalable VMs are an interesting idea, but for a typical session > >> how much RAM are we talking about? > > > > If you look at some contemporary VM hosting providers, like e.g.: > > http://bloggerkhan.com/vps-hosting-vps-servers/185 > > > > You'll see that most of them are in the 384-1024 meg of ram range, and > > almost none are larger than 4 gigs. I'm sure most of these run 32bit > > images, but the hosts are likely 64bit, so it seems to make quite some > > sense to use an x32 ABI here. > > Can x32 run i686 software (multilib) ? > Because not being able to run existing software might be a reason for > many to want such a host. x32 is not a kernel, so it doesn't "run software". The kernel you run is a standard x86-64 one which can access all your physical memory, then you have a 32bit userspace mode similar to i386-on-x86-64 but with a different ABI that lets it use more x86-64 features while only using 32bit pointers (so each process can only use 4 gig of virtual memory). -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
