[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAEdQ38GNU_vCFgi-uuFCW_QVBObTdD8VwoyQ71Cm5dNfZ4+=JQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 May 2024 12:06:38 -0400
From: Matt Turner <mattst88@...il.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@...aro.org>, Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@...assic.park.msu.ru>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/14] alpha: cleanups for 6.10
On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 4:12 AM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
>
> I had investigated dropping support for alpha EV5 and earlier a while
> ago after noticing that this is the only supported CPU family
> in the kernel without native byte access and that Debian has already
> dropped support for this generation last year [1] after it turned
> out to be broken.
>
> This topic came up again when Paul E. McKenney noticed that
> parts of the RCU code already rely on byte access and do not
> work on alpha EV5 reliably, so I refreshed my series now for
> inclusion into the next merge window.
>
> Al Viro did another series for alpha to address all the known build
> issues. I rebased his patches without any further changes and included
> it as a baseline for my work here to avoid conflicts.
Thanks for all this. Removing support for non-BWX alphas makes a lot
of sense to me.
The whole series is
Acked-by: Matt Turner <mattst88@...il.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists