From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>
Cc: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] remove arch/sh?
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 16:23:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190625142341.GA6948@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190625142144.GC1506@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 10:21:44AM -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
> I'm generally okay with all proposed non-functional changes that come
> up that are just eliminating arch-specific cruft to use new shared
> kernel infrastructure. I recall replying to a few indicating this, but
> I missed a lot more. If it would be helpful I think I can commit to
> doing at least this more consistently, but I'm happy to have other
> maintainers make that call too.
It woud be great if you could at least apply with a tentative ack.
At least for some trees we try very hard to get a maintainer ack,
so silence is holding things back to some extent.
I'd also like to second Arnds request to figure out if any bits
are truely dead. E.g. 64-bit sh5 support very much appears so.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>
Cc: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] remove arch/sh?
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 14:23:41 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190625142341.GA6948@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190625142144.GC1506@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 10:21:44AM -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
> I'm generally okay with all proposed non-functional changes that come
> up that are just eliminating arch-specific cruft to use new shared
> kernel infrastructure. I recall replying to a few indicating this, but
> I missed a lot more. If it would be helpful I think I can commit to
> doing at least this more consistently, but I'm happy to have other
> maintainers make that call too.
It woud be great if you could at least apply with a tentative ack.
At least for some trees we try very hard to get a maintainer ack,
so silence is holding things back to some extent.
I'd also like to second Arnds request to figure out if any bits
are truely dead. E.g. 64-bit sh5 support very much appears so.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-25 14:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-25 8:56 [RFC] remove arch/sh? Christoph Hellwig
2019-06-25 8:56 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-06-25 9:02 ` John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
2019-06-25 9:02 ` John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
2019-06-25 11:21 ` Adam Borowski
2019-06-25 11:21 ` Adam Borowski
2019-06-25 12:02 ` John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
2019-06-25 12:02 ` John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
2019-06-25 12:50 ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-06-25 12:50 ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-06-25 14:28 ` Rich Felker
2019-06-25 14:28 ` Rich Felker
2019-06-25 15:48 ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-06-25 15:48 ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-06-26 11:25 ` Yoshinori Sato
2019-06-26 11:25 ` Yoshinori Sato
2019-06-26 15:38 ` Rich Felker
2019-06-26 15:38 ` Rich Felker
2019-06-26 15:56 ` John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
2019-06-26 15:56 ` John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
2019-07-05 13:51 ` Yoshinori Sato
2019-07-05 13:51 ` Yoshinori Sato
2019-07-05 14:04 ` John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
2019-07-05 14:04 ` John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
2019-07-05 15:14 ` Rich Felker
2019-07-05 15:14 ` Rich Felker
2019-06-25 14:21 ` Rich Felker
2019-06-25 14:21 ` Rich Felker
2019-06-25 14:23 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2019-06-25 14:23 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-06-25 14:29 ` Rich Felker
2019-06-25 14:29 ` Rich Felker
2019-06-25 14:31 ` John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
2019-06-25 14:31 ` John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190625142341.GA6948@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=dalias@libc.org \
--cc=glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ysato@users.sourceforge.jp \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.