[Ksummit-2012-discuss] [ATTEND] <ding> "Bring out your dead" <ding>...

H. Peter Anvin hpa at zytor.com
Tue Jun 26 21:06:32 UTC 2012

On 06/26/2012 01:05 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> Maybe it's time to start a linux-legacy kernel project and move stuff
>> in there that we are no longer interested in having in the regular
>> kernel. I don't think we should be doing this as long as the maintainer
>> is reasonably active and prefers to have the code upstream, but if either
>> there is no maintainer or the maintainer prefers to have his code in the
>> legacy tree, we could have a fast-path out.
> Makes sense to me, though as of 2010 the Alpha guys were definitely
> interested in remaining in the Linux kernel.

Who are the "alpha guys" and to what extent are they willing to make
sure they don't become a roadblock to general kernel development?  It is
getting a *very* frequent objection to various design choices that "I
would have to touch every architecture if we did it this way."
Obviously, this indicates a real problem if contributors are pushing
suboptimal solutions, often because of a semi-arbitrary boundary what is
arch and what is not.

One *serious* issue is that we have things in the "arch" domain that are
there only because we keep using handcrafted ABIs for system calls
instead of picking rules that can be mechanized.

asm-generic helps that somewhat for new arches, but there are a lot of
old ones that don't use asm-generic, and even asm-generic doesn't cover
all the bases.


More information about the Ksummit-2012-discuss mailing list