Re: Bug#691576: GDB still broken with 3.11.10-1
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 09:15:23PM +0100, Émeric MASCHINO wrote:
> 2013/12/12 Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>:
> > So far as I know, there is no longer any commercial development of
> > Linux on Itanium. Some old 'enterprise' distributions might
> > continue to be supported for a few years but mainline isn't
> > supported.
>
> It seems that Intel must provide hp with Itanium CPUs till 2017 [1][2].
>
> With respect to this GDB problem, but also people having problem
> booting Wheezy on some systems, does it mean that nobody at Intel
> ensure that Linux still works fine with actual (and upcoming?) Itanium
> CPUs?
Tony Luck at Intel is still maintainer for ia64 but I don't think
even he's working full time on it.
> Well, since hp is the major customer for Itanium CPUs, it's entirely
> plausible after all that hp focuses on hp-ux and thus Intel doesn't
> care about Linux on ia64.
HP focuses on propietary operating systems that it can maintain by
itself and which are now exclusive to Itanium - HP-UX, NonStop and
OpenVMS.
I assume they gave up on Linux/ia64 once the enterprise distributors
did.
> > I heard from Will Deacon that gcc's code generation for ia64 has
> > regressed in 4.6 or earlier and this may be responsible for some
> > reported kernel bugs. He also though that reducing the
> > optimisation level could help.
> >
> > I actually tried building the kernel like that, so you could try the
> > packages in:
> >
> > http://people.debian.org/~benh/packages/wheezy-ia64-kernel-O1/
>
> No, I didn't play with GCC optimization settings.
>
> Was your O1-compiled kernel working fine?
I have no idea as no-one has reported their results yet.
> Do you know if GCC regressions observed by Will Deacon are documented somewhere?
No, you'd have to ask him.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance.
- Robert Coveyou
Reply to: