On 9/4/20 10:21 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: > On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 17:52, Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> It's buggy and we are not sure anyone uses it. > >> +``ppc64abi32`` CPUs (since 5.2.0) >> +''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' >> + >> +The ``ppc64abi32`` architecture has a number of issues which regularly >> +trip up our CI testing and is suspected to be quite broken. >> +Furthermore the maintainers are unsure what the correct behaviour >> +should be and strongly suspect no one actually uses it. > > IRC discussion suggests we do know what the correct behaviour > is -- it should be "what the compat32 interface of a 64-bit > PPC kernel gives you", it's just that the code doesn't do that > (and never has?). It's like the mipsn32, mipsn32el, sparc32plus > ABIs which we also implement (hopefully correctly...) > > But "this has always been broken and nobody complained" is > a good reason to deprecate anyway. Indeed. With the last sentence changed to "For that reason the maintainers strongly suspect no one actually uses it." Reviewed-by: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@xxxxxxxxxx> r~
