From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBF08C3A589 for ; Thu, 15 Aug 2019 13:11:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5C932083B for ; Thu, 15 Aug 2019 13:11:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732038AbfHONLn (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Aug 2019 09:11:43 -0400 Received: from mail-qt1-f195.google.com ([209.85.160.195]:37150 "EHLO mail-qt1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731282AbfHONLn (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Aug 2019 09:11:43 -0400 Received: by mail-qt1-f195.google.com with SMTP id y26so2251139qto.4; Thu, 15 Aug 2019 06:11:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Oj5UE2LGVcMS9SysCoBFopHSBvRpgrX1g7nT1W4Cv9s=; b=HmHrpfoylIv+xenX+ud7+vckyYDAz7lESPt20PyQy2YEInPQleZa1NVmH0x4CfYiBJ JXW7Hl0Ra0lW+jouPOonVpIg8RvjwGgENSVMn351rtO0nD5SsJqrsAcNSeWu/VqzrnXX ElBk6PwCa12NBNyZiaKQECiegQ1dDbulhdA4XZJd5ElX8WlaW43i0ZjbuGEgorzggdZx HVgsGhDqkmwVpcvSSntpkMagxMhhIhJoaq6e81Vz+jeRtwMYoJ4Fn2FVvVcNIZ03ySAT fwdWqTd3IjVxa/LeZgJVcrxfao45oXHsYq3Tv5zKnSQWED52q9jBCcbzyManuc5vU6tk 2s/Q== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWHpTUJLk1TW3XlkPOlsBoewZwdFvYWLwRVRkD4eOrfOI8oLzgj vn+GtPPpgIXLfr246yq4GX/Sw/QE7ADJfz7Te4k= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxABsAyr+BlU4FYBzPP5E1lu5hNr5RQd0ASTCcdU5s/TSRX7ngTvmZ5zwiRax3ZP5e4wh7pQOi1eFXPhhKeyw0= X-Received: by 2002:ad4:53cb:: with SMTP id k11mr3085440qvv.93.1565874701634; Thu, 15 Aug 2019 06:11:41 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190731195713.3150463-1-arnd@arndb.de> <20190731225303.GC1330@shell.armlinux.org.uk> In-Reply-To: From: Arnd Bergmann Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 15:11:25 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/14] ARM: move lpc32xx and dove to multiplatform To: Russell King - ARM Linux admin Cc: SoC Team , Linux ARM , Vladimir Zapolskiy , Sylvain Lemieux , Gregory Clement , Linus Walleij , Jason Cooper , Andrew Lunn , Sebastian Hesselbarth , "David S. Miller" , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Alan Stern , Guenter Roeck , "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" , Networking , linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, USB list , LINUXWATCHDOG Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-watchdog-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:33 AM Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 12:53 AM Russell King - ARM Linux admin > wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 09:56:42PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > For dove, the patches are basically what I had proposed back in > > > 2015 when all other ARMv6/ARMv7 machines became part of a single > > > kernel build. I don't know what the state is mach-dove support is, > > > compared to the DT based support in mach-mvebu for the same > > > hardware. If they are functionally the same, we could also just > > > remove mach-dove rather than applying my patches. > > > > Well, the good news is that I'm down to a small board support file > > for the Dove Cubox now - but the bad news is, that there's still a > > board support file necessary to support everything the Dove SoC has > > to offer. > > > > Even for a DT based Dove Cubox, I'm still using mach-dove, but it > > may be possible to drop most of mach-dove now. Without spending a > > lot of time digging through it, it's impossible to really know. > > Ok, so we won't remove it then, but I'd like to merge my patches to > at least get away from the special case of requiring a separate kernel > image for it. > > Can you try if applying patches 12 and 14 from my series causes > problems for you? (it may be easier to apply the entire set > or pull from [1] to avoid rebase conflicts). I applied patches 12 and 13 into the soc tree now. There are some other pending multiplatform conversions (iop32x, ep93xx, lpc32xx, omap1), but it looks like none of those will be complete for 5.4. I now expect that we can get most of the preparation into 5.4, and maybe move them all over together in 5.5 after some more testing. If someone finds a problem with the one of the preparation steps, that we can revert the individual patches more easily. Arnd