Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 00/23] ILP32 for ARM64 | From | Andrey Konovalov <> | Date | Thu, 1 Oct 2015 19:42:04 +0300 |
| |
On 10/01/2015 02:36 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 12:19:31PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 05:41:03PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > >>> Indeed. On that subject there was some discussion at Linaro Connect >>> last week about work (being done outside Linaro, not sure how public it >>> is at this point) to pull together the current state of the art into a >>> Docker container image which people can use for benchmarking and as a >>> reference for how to pull things together. That should help with the >>> analysis, it'll at least make it easier for other people to reproduce >>> any benchmarking results.
Using Docker image sounds like a great idea.
>> That's fine and I would welcome it. However, I'm definitely against >> using non-agreed ABI and further spreading such toolchains (or kernel > > You might want to speak to some of your colleagues about that... in any > case I'll reply off list later today with information on the third party > working on this so you can get in touch, like I say I'm not sure how > public that work is at this point. > >> patches; Linaro's tracking kernel has kept these patches for a long >> time, even though the ABI has been NAK'ed). > > I know, I'm not thrilled about that either. :/
Same for me. As you have noticed, ILP32 was removed from Linaro's tracking kernel recently. The thing is that we (builds&baselines team in Linaro) have been requested to have a CI loop for ILP32. So I'll continue running it, but will use a separate git branch for ILP32. The linux-linaro branch will not have ILP32 any more (or at least until ILP32 ABI is agreed on).
Thanks, Andrey
> > _______________________________________________ > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel >
| |