On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 07:50:33PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 7:30 PM Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 09:23:28AM -0800, Christoph Lameter (Ampere) wrote: > > > On Thu, 21 Nov 2024, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > > Linux has supported m68k since last century. > > > > > > Yeah I fondly remember the 80s where 68K systems were always out of reach > > > for me to have. The dream system that I never could get my hands on. The > > > creme de la creme du jour. I just had to be content with the 6800 and > > > 6502 processors. Then IBM started the sick road down the 8088, 8086 > > > that led from crap to more crap. Sigh. > > > > > > > Any new such assumptions are fixed quickly (at least in the kernel). > > > > If you need a specific alignment, make sure to use __aligned and/or > > > > appropriate padding in structures. > > > > And yes, the compiler knows, and provides __alignof__. > > > > > > > > > How do you deal with torn reads/writes in such a scenario? Is this UP > > > > > only? > > > > > > > > Linux does not support (rate) SMP m68k machines. > > s/rate/rare/ > > > > Ah. Ok that explains it. > > > > > > Do we really need to maintain support for a platform that has been > > > obsolete for decade and does not even support SMP? > > > > Since this keeps coming up, I think there is a much more important > > question to ask: > > > > Do we really need to continue supporting nommu machines ? Is anyone > > but me even boot testing those ? > > Not all m68k platform are nommu. > Yes, I wasn't trying to point to m68k, but to nommu in general. Guenter
