linux-kernel - Re: avr32 build failures in linux-next

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAHp75Ve-ArHcma+0krWdvYCREZg3sLA=AoqcOaKgYhAW2KtYqQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 9 Mar 2016 21:30:55 +0200
From:	Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:	Måns Rullgård <mans@...sr.com>,
	Hans-Christian Noren Egtvedt <egtvedt@...fundet.no>,
	Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>,
	Haavard Skinnemoen <hskinnemoen@...il.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: avr32 build failures in linux-next

On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 6:02 AM, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
> On 02/08/2016 08:06 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 7:28 PM, Måns Rullgård <mans@...sr.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Not very surprising either.  The number of people using Linux on avr32
>>> is probably approximately zero, and if anyone is, they're likely still
>>> running 2.6.32 or thereabouts.
>>
>>
>> Once I tried up the topic about removal avr32 for good, but looks like
>> it wasn't a good time. Maybe now is better? It would really reduce a
>> burden on many drivers.
>>
> I would agree, as long as the maintainers agree. We don't want to repeat
> the h8300 experience.

So, are we going to agree that avr32 must be retired from next cycle?

P.S. I have no idea how to fix this "…relocation truncated to fit:
R_AVR32_21S…", though I can test anything anyone propose.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko