* Michael Mrozek <EvilDragon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [200428 14:27]: > Am Dienstag, den 28.04.2020, 14:30 +0100 schrieb Marc Zyngier: > I know we have to accept the decision, but so far, I've known Linux to support > as many older devices as possible as well - removing KVM Host 32bit support > would be a step back here. > > Is there a specific reason for that? > Is it too complex to maintain alongside the aarch64 KVM Host? I don't know the details, but ideally things would be set up in a way where folks interested in patching 32-bit arm kvm support can do so without causing issues for 64-bit kvm development. That being said, I don't know who might be interested in doing all the work for that. It's unrealistic to expect Marc to do this work if he's not using it. Features that are used get more resources, and features that are less used end up just bitrotting into a broken state in about six weeks in the Linux kernel :) Regards, Tony _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
