From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 08:57:08 +0000 Subject: removig ia64, was: Re: [PATCH 3/4] mm/tlb, x86/mm: Support invalidating TLB caches for RCU_TABLE_FRE Message-Id: <20180827085708.GA27172@infradead.org> List-Id: References: <20180823134525.5f12b0d3@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> <776104d4c8e4fc680004d69e3a4c2594b638b6d1.camel@au1.ibm.com> <20180823133958.GA1496@brain-police> <20180824084717.GK24124@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20180824113214.GK24142@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20180824113953.GL24142@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20180827150008.13bce08f@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> <20180827074701.GW24124@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> In-Reply-To: <20180827074701.GW24124@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Nicholas Piggin , Will Deacon , Linus Torvalds , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Andrew Lutomirski , the arch/x86 maintainers , Borislav Petkov , Rik van Riel , Jann Horn , Adin Scannell , Dave Hansen , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-mm , David Miller , Martin Schwidefsky , Michael Ellerman , Tony Luck , Fenghua Yu , linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 09:47:01AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > sh is trivial, arm seems doable, with a bit of luck we can do 'rm -rf > arch/ia64' leaving us with s390. Is removing ia64 a serious plan? It is the cause for a fair share of oddities in dma lang, and I did not have much luck getting maintainer replies lately, but I didn't know of a plan to get rid of it. What is the state of people still using ia64 mainline kernels vs just old distros in the still existing machines?