[lkml]   [2017]   [Jul]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v8 00/20] ILP32 for ARM64
Hi Yury,

On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 02:26:24PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 06:11:36PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 12:59:02AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote:
> > > If so, I would like to ask you to do the first ILP32 community poll
> > > now, not in 6 months. So we'll collect opinions and requests from
> > > people interested in ILP32, and in 6 month will be able to check the
> > > progress. I would like to see this thread public because if we are not
> > > taking ILP32 to official sources right now, this is the only way to
> > > inform people that the project exists and is ready to use.
> >
> > That's an ongoing process, I'm not going to ask for people's opinion
> > every 6 months. It's just that I will revisit periodically the progress
> > on automated testing, public availability of a cross-toolchain,
> > Tested/Acked/Reviewed-by tags on these patches from interested parties.
> > Since I haven't seen any of these now, I don't see any point in asking.
> >
> > To be clear, I'm not really interested in "we need this too" opinions, I
> > get lots of these via the marketing channels. I'm looking for actual
> > users with a long-term view of making/keeping ILP32 a first class ABI.
> From my side, there are people who ask me for help with ilo32, and who
> write from big companies mailservers. But they don't want to ask
> their questions publicly for some reason. From my point of view, there
> is not so big but stable interest in ILP32.

It would be nice if they were more open about what they need/use.

> This is the 4.12 and linux-next - based kernel patches:

Thanks. I'll publish the 4.12-based branch sometime next week.

At this stage I don't see much value in a linux-next based ILP32. I
would rather like to see a 4.13-rc3 based one, in preparation for a 4.13
branch once released.

> Should I resend kernel patches to LKML, or links above are enough for
> you?

The 4.12 link is ok. However, could you please post a 4.13-rcX based
series, maybe split in two so that a few generic patches can be merged
in 4.14? Given the reworking of the sigcontext code in 4.13, it would be
good to review the ILP32 changes in this area again.



 \ /
  Last update: 2017-07-27 19:13    [W:0.105 / U:32.092 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site