Re: [crosspost] dropping support for ia64

[Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh%linuxfoundation.org@localhost>]

On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 09:46:57AM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Mon, 22 May 2023 at 09:39, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> <gregkh%linuxfoundation.org@localhost> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 09:08:35AM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > > (cc Greg as stable maintainer)
> > >
> > > On Sat, 20 May 2023 at 21:23, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
> > > <glaubitz%physik.fu-berlin.de@localhost> wrote:
> > > >
> > > ...
> > > >
> > > > I have been thinking about this discussion for a while now and my suggestion
> > > > would be to drop ia64 support from the kernel, GRUB and gcc/binutils/glibc in
> > > > this order:
> > > >
> > > > - Kernel: After the next LTS release
> > > > - GRUB: After the 2.12 release
> > > > - gcc/binutils/glibc: After support was dropped from the kernel
> > > >
> > > > This way anyone still using ia64 will be able to use it with a supported codebase
> > > > for an extended time and upstream projects have target releases for which they
> > > > can plan the removal.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Yeah, I think this is reasonable. Having a clear agreement on where
> > > the support ends helps both the remaining users and the developers
> > > eager to move on.
> > >
> > > My only question is how we would land fixes for ia64 into this Linux
> > > LTS release if there is no upstream any longer to draw from.
> > >
> > > Greg, could you comment on this?
> >
> > That would imply that people actually used that arch and code, so why
> > would it have been removed from Linus's tree?
> >
> 
> As far as we have been able to establish, the only people that use
> this arch and code are people that would hate to see it go, but don't
> actually use it for anything other than checking whether it still
> boots, and don't have the skills or bandwidth to step up and maintain
> it upstream.

Great, then let's drop it today, there is no need to wait until the end
of the year as nothing is going to change then.

thanks,

greg k-h