From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753946AbdDKLdq (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Apr 2017 07:33:46 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:58856 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752606AbdDKLdm (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Apr 2017 07:33:42 -0400 Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 12:33:35 +0100 From: Catalin Marinas To: Yury Norov Cc: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Pinski , Heiko Carstens , Chris Metcalf , philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com, Joseph Myers , zhouchengming1@huawei.com, Steve Ellcey , Prasun.Kapoor@caviumnetworks.com, Andreas Schwab , agraf@suse.de, szabolcs.nagy@arm.com, geert@linux-m68k.org, Adam Borowski , manuel.montezelo@gmail.com, Chris Metcalf , Arnd Bergmann , Andrew Pinski , linyongting@huawei.com, klimov.linux@gmail.com, broonie@kernel.org, Bamvor Zhangjian , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Maxim Kuvyrkov , Florian Weimer , Nathan_Lynch@mentor.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ramana Radhakrishnan , schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, davem@davemloft.net, christoph.muellner@theobroma-systems.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 resend 00/20] ILP32 for ARM64 Message-ID: <20170411113334.GA27857@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <1488395968-14313-1-git-send-email-ynorov@caviumnetworks.com> <20170410194740.GA28503@yury-N73SV> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170410194740.GA28503@yury-N73SV> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 11:47:40PM +0400, Yury Norov wrote: > According to latest plans figured out on Linaro Connect, ILP32 should > be taken in 4.12 merge window. Sorry, I wasn't present at Linaro Connect, so definitely not involved in such decision. BTW, it would be nice to have Arnd's ack on patch 2 (32-bit ABI: introduce ARCH_32BIT_OFF_T config option). > The window will be opened in less than a month, so I'd like to remind > it to you, and ask if you have any questions/requests related to > ILP32. Is it still realistic idea to take patches in 4.12? 4.12 is not realistic and I wouldn't commit to a specific kernel version. Given the intrusiveness, such patches should sit in -next for at least 3-4 weeks (i.e. merged in the arch tree around -rc3). Anyway, I don't think the plan has changed since last time I stated it: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/12/5/333 I haven't got the chance to test these patches yet, run benchmarks (step 4). Also, the latest benchmarks I've seen were mostly for user space while I'm more concerned with the user-kernel interface (https://marc.info/?l=linux-arm-kernel&m=148690490713310&w=2). Is there an up to date pre-built toolchain and a filesystem for ILP32? On the glibc testing side, have the regressions been identified/fixed? -- Catalin From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: catalin.marinas@arm.com (Catalin Marinas) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 12:33:35 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v7 resend 00/20] ILP32 for ARM64 In-Reply-To: <20170410194740.GA28503@yury-N73SV> References: <1488395968-14313-1-git-send-email-ynorov@caviumnetworks.com> <20170410194740.GA28503@yury-N73SV> Message-ID: <20170411113334.GA27857@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 11:47:40PM +0400, Yury Norov wrote: > According to latest plans figured out on Linaro Connect, ILP32 should > be taken in 4.12 merge window. Sorry, I wasn't present at Linaro Connect, so definitely not involved in such decision. BTW, it would be nice to have Arnd's ack on patch 2 (32-bit ABI: introduce ARCH_32BIT_OFF_T config option). > The window will be opened in less than a month, so I'd like to remind > it to you, and ask if you have any questions/requests related to > ILP32. Is it still realistic idea to take patches in 4.12? 4.12 is not realistic and I wouldn't commit to a specific kernel version. Given the intrusiveness, such patches should sit in -next for at least 3-4 weeks (i.e. merged in the arch tree around -rc3). Anyway, I don't think the plan has changed since last time I stated it: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/12/5/333 I haven't got the chance to test these patches yet, run benchmarks (step 4). Also, the latest benchmarks I've seen were mostly for user space while I'm more concerned with the user-kernel interface (https://marc.info/?l=linux-arm-kernel&m=148690490713310&w=2). Is there an up to date pre-built toolchain and a filesystem for ILP32? On the glibc testing side, have the regressions been identified/fixed? -- Catalin