From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Rapoport Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2023 05:04:53 +0000 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] Retire IA64/Itanium support Message-Id: List-Id: References: <20230215100008.2565237-1-ardb@kernel.org> <534469b750e1847e1645f9ae5ed19dcc80b82be6.camel@physik.fu-berlin.de> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Linus Torvalds Cc: "Luck, Tony" , John Paul Adrian Glaubitz , Al Viro , Ard Biesheuvel , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Jonathan Corbet , Arnd Bergmann , Jessica Clarke , Matthew Wilcox , Marc Zyngier , Guenter Roeck , "linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org" Hi Linus, On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 12:08:28PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 11:43 AM Luck, Tony wrote: > > > > Maybe you don't see others pain? I added Al Viro ... perhaps > > he'll replay some of his thoughts from trying to make signals > > and other stuff work correctly on ia64. > > Well, as long as it's ia64-specific, I'll just go "hey, it was Al's > choice to look at that code". > > IOW, I'm more worried about "ia64 makes it a pain to make _generic_ changes". > > IOW, doing something like this: > > git log -p --no-merges --since=1.year arch/ia64/ > > to see what kind of pain ia64 parts of patches have caused, about a > third of them are that "look, somebody cared about ia64 explicitly". I remember that when I was doing cleanups of mm initialization, ia64 required special care several times. > That said, it's entirely possible I've missed some particular painpoint. The largest painpoint IMO is absence of any ability to test ia64 except sending patches to Adrian in a hope he has time to give them a whirl. > Linus -- Sincerely yours, Mike.