From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99255C83000 for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 16:26:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [128.59.11.253]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35AEE206D8 for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 16:26:18 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 35AEE206D8 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=atomide.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FB644B17B; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 12:26:17 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uELIhKgBtAax; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 12:26:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 938484B1E3; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 12:26:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FDB04B1C2 for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 12:26:15 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8HwKZUKvrZkW for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 12:26:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from muru.com (muru.com [72.249.23.125]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5142B4B17B for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 12:26:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from atomide.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by muru.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8684180F3; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 16:27:02 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 09:26:11 -0700 From: Tony Lindgren To: Michael Mrozek Subject: Re: Against removing aarch32 kvm host support Message-ID: <20200428162611.GW43721@atomide.com> References: <20200428143850.4c8cbd2a@luklap> <916b6072a4a2688745a5e3f75c1c8c01@misterjones.org> <9c67a3722611d1ec9fe1e8a1fbe65956b32147c3.camel@openpandora.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9c67a3722611d1ec9fe1e8a1fbe65956b32147c3.camel@openpandora.org> Cc: Marc Zyngier , Lukas Straub , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org, kernel@pyra-handheld.com X-BeenThere: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Where KVM/ARM decisions are made List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Sender: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu * Michael Mrozek [200428 14:27]: > Am Dienstag, den 28.04.2020, 14:30 +0100 schrieb Marc Zyngier: > I know we have to accept the decision, but so far, I've known Linux to support > as many older devices as possible as well - removing KVM Host 32bit support > would be a step back here. > > Is there a specific reason for that? > Is it too complex to maintain alongside the aarch64 KVM Host? I don't know the details, but ideally things would be set up in a way where folks interested in patching 32-bit arm kvm support can do so without causing issues for 64-bit kvm development. That being said, I don't know who might be interested in doing all the work for that. It's unrealistic to expect Marc to do this work if he's not using it. Features that are used get more resources, and features that are less used end up just bitrotting into a broken state in about six weeks in the Linux kernel :) Regards, Tony _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 057F3C83000 for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 16:26:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEE0820730 for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 16:26:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728350AbgD1Q0O (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Apr 2020 12:26:14 -0400 Received: from muru.com ([72.249.23.125]:51636 "EHLO muru.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727920AbgD1Q0O (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Apr 2020 12:26:14 -0400 Received: from atomide.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by muru.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8684180F3; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 16:27:02 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 09:26:11 -0700 From: Tony Lindgren To: Michael Mrozek Cc: Marc Zyngier , Lukas Straub , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org, kernel@pyra-handheld.com Subject: Re: Against removing aarch32 kvm host support Message-ID: <20200428162611.GW43721@atomide.com> References: <20200428143850.4c8cbd2a@luklap> <916b6072a4a2688745a5e3f75c1c8c01@misterjones.org> <9c67a3722611d1ec9fe1e8a1fbe65956b32147c3.camel@openpandora.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9c67a3722611d1ec9fe1e8a1fbe65956b32147c3.camel@openpandora.org> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org * Michael Mrozek [200428 14:27]: > Am Dienstag, den 28.04.2020, 14:30 +0100 schrieb Marc Zyngier: > I know we have to accept the decision, but so far, I've known Linux to support > as many older devices as possible as well - removing KVM Host 32bit support > would be a step back here. > > Is there a specific reason for that? > Is it too complex to maintain alongside the aarch64 KVM Host? I don't know the details, but ideally things would be set up in a way where folks interested in patching 32-bit arm kvm support can do so without causing issues for 64-bit kvm development. That being said, I don't know who might be interested in doing all the work for that. It's unrealistic to expect Marc to do this work if he's not using it. Features that are used get more resources, and features that are less used end up just bitrotting into a broken state in about six weeks in the Linux kernel :) Regards, Tony