* Re: [v2] Old platforms: bring out your dead
@ 2021-01-15 20:37 John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
2021-01-15 21:17 ` Arnd Bergmann
0 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz @ 2021-01-15 20:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linux ARM
Cc: Baruch Siach, Geert Uytterhoeven, Neil Armstrong, Viresh Kumar,
Linus Walleij, Daniel Tang, Jamie Iles, Krzysztof Adamski,
Alexander Shiyan, Michael Ellerman, Russell King - ARM Linux,
Wei Xu, Oleksij Rempel, Alex Elder, Marc Gonzalez,
Hans Ulli Kroll, Uwe Kleine-König, Steven Rostedt,
Vladimir Zapolskiy, Lubomir Rintel, Krzysztof Halasa,
Koen Vandeputte, Leizhen (ThunderTown),
Barry Song, Thomas Bogendoerfer, Yoshinori Sato, Jonas Jensen,
Tony Prisk, Hartley Sweeten, Mark Salter, Shawn Guo
Hello Arnd!
> * No objection to removing arch/powerpc/platforms/cell that I
> had mentioned I plan to do.
Does this affect the capability to run Linux on the PS3?
If yes, it would be great if it could stay as the PS3 is a rather
widely used platform although you certainly won't find any PS3
users on the LKML.
Adrian
--
.''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' : Debian Developer - glaubitz@debian.org
`. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de
`- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [v2] Old platforms: bring out your dead
2021-01-15 20:37 [v2] Old platforms: bring out your dead John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
@ 2021-01-15 21:17 ` Arnd Bergmann
2021-01-17 10:33 ` Michael Ellerman
0 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2021-01-15 21:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
Cc: Baruch Siach, Geert Uytterhoeven, Neil Armstrong, Viresh Kumar,
Linus Walleij, Daniel Tang, Jamie Iles, Krzysztof Adamski,
Alexander Shiyan, Michael Ellerman, Russell King - ARM Linux,
Wei Xu, Oleksij Rempel, Alex Elder, Marc Gonzalez,
Hans Ulli Kroll, Uwe Kleine-König, Steven Rostedt,
Vladimir Zapolskiy, Lubomir Rintel, Krzysztof Halasa,
Koen Vandeputte, Leizhen (ThunderTown),
Linux ARM, Barry Song, Thomas Bogendoerfer, Yoshinori Sato,
Jonas Jensen, Tony Prisk, Hartley Sweeten, Mark Salter,
Shawn Guo
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 9:37 PM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
<glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
>
> Hello Arnd!
>
> > * No objection to removing arch/powerpc/platforms/cell that I
> > had mentioned I plan to do.
>
> Does this affect the capability to run Linux on the PS3?
>
> If yes, it would be great if it could stay as the PS3 is a rather
> widely used platform although you certainly won't find any PS3
> users on the LKML.
No, as I wrote in the initial email, I'm planning to move the things
(like spufs) that are shared with PS3 into arch/powerpc/platforms/ps3
and remove the parts that are only used on the IBM blades.
Arnd
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [v2] Old platforms: bring out your dead
2021-01-15 21:17 ` Arnd Bergmann
@ 2021-01-17 10:33 ` Michael Ellerman
2021-01-17 10:56 ` Arnd Bergmann
0 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: Michael Ellerman @ 2021-01-17 10:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnd Bergmann, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
Cc: Baruch Siach, Geert Uytterhoeven, Neil Armstrong, Viresh Kumar,
Linus Walleij, Daniel Tang, Jamie Iles, Krzysztof Adamski,
Alexander Shiyan, Russell King - ARM Linux, Wei Xu,
Oleksij Rempel, Uwe Kleine-König, Marc Gonzalez,
Hans Ulli Kroll, Alex Elder, Steven Rostedt, Vladimir Zapolskiy,
Lubomir Rintel, Krzysztof Halasa, Koen Vandeputte,
Leizhen (ThunderTown),
Linux ARM, Barry Song, Thomas Bogendoerfer, Yoshinori Sato,
Jonas Jensen, Hartley Sweeten, Mark Salter, Shawn Guo
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> writes:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 9:37 PM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
> <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
>>
>> Hello Arnd!
>>
>> > * No objection to removing arch/powerpc/platforms/cell that I
>> > had mentioned I plan to do.
>>
>> Does this affect the capability to run Linux on the PS3?
>>
>> If yes, it would be great if it could stay as the PS3 is a rather
>> widely used platform although you certainly won't find any PS3
>> users on the LKML.
>
> No, as I wrote in the initial email, I'm planning to move the things
> (like spufs) that are shared with PS3 into arch/powerpc/platforms/ps3
> and remove the parts that are only used on the IBM blades.
As I said a while back, I'm not convinced that's a good idea.
The only way I have of testing cell is using a QS22, I don't have a PS3
capable of running Linux these days. I worry that if I can't test cell
at all then the PS3 support will bit rot.
I know Geoff tests PS3, but that seems sporadic, I don't think he tests
linux-next every day.
I also don't think the cell blade support is really causing much in the
way of maintenance overhead. The thing that's causing work is spufs, and
that would remain either way.
I'd be happy to drop any QS20/21 code we have, but I'm not convinced
dropping QS22 is a good trade off.
cheers
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [v2] Old platforms: bring out your dead
2021-01-17 10:33 ` Michael Ellerman
@ 2021-01-17 10:56 ` Arnd Bergmann
2021-01-17 13:26 ` John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
2021-01-21 11:58 ` Michael Ellerman
0 siblings, 2 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2021-01-17 10:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michael Ellerman
Cc: Baruch Siach, Geert Uytterhoeven, Neil Armstrong, Viresh Kumar,
Linus Walleij, Leizhen (ThunderTown),
Daniel Tang, Jamie Iles, Krzysztof Adamski, Alexander Shiyan,
Russell King - ARM Linux, Wei Xu, Oleksij Rempel, Alex Elder,
Marc Gonzalez, Hans Ulli Kroll, Uwe Kleine-König,
Steven Rostedt, Vladimir Zapolskiy, Lubomir Rintel,
Krzysztof Halasa, Koen Vandeputte, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz,
Linux ARM, Barry Song, Thomas Bogendoerfer, Yoshinori Sato,
Jonas Jensen, Hartley Sweeten, Mark Salter, Shawn Guo
On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at 11:33 AM Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> wrote:
> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> writes:
> > On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 9:37 PM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
> > <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello Arnd!
> >>
> >> > * No objection to removing arch/powerpc/platforms/cell that I
> >> > had mentioned I plan to do.
> >>
> >> Does this affect the capability to run Linux on the PS3?
> >>
> >> If yes, it would be great if it could stay as the PS3 is a rather
> >> widely used platform although you certainly won't find any PS3
> >> users on the LKML.
> >
> > No, as I wrote in the initial email, I'm planning to move the things
> > (like spufs) that are shared with PS3 into arch/powerpc/platforms/ps3
> > and remove the parts that are only used on the IBM blades.
>
> As I said a while back, I'm not convinced that's a good idea.
>
> The only way I have of testing cell is using a QS22, I don't have a PS3
> capable of running Linux these days. I worry that if I can't test cell
> at all then the PS3 support will bit rot.
Fair enough. I must have missed your previous reply and expected
that your QS22 had stopped being operational years ago and that
there were already zero machines getting kernel updates.
Are you aware of any other users?
> I know Geoff tests PS3, but that seems sporadic, I don't think he tests
> linux-next every day.
>
> I also don't think the cell blade support is really causing much in the
> way of maintenance overhead. The thing that's causing work is spufs, and
> that would remain either way.
>
> I'd be happy to drop any QS20/21 code we have, but I'm not convinced
> dropping QS22 is a good trade off.
Right, I agree that there is little to gain from dropping QS20/21, the
only files that I see this would impact are
arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spider-pci.c
arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spider-pic.c
drivers/net/ethernet/toshiba/spider_net*
Dropping all of native (as opposed to PS3 hypervisor based) Cell support
would be a useful cleanup I think, but not as long as you still use it.
Arnd
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [v2] Old platforms: bring out your dead
2021-01-17 10:56 ` Arnd Bergmann
@ 2021-01-17 13:26 ` John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
2021-01-21 11:58 ` Michael Ellerman
1 sibling, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz @ 2021-01-17 13:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnd Bergmann, Michael Ellerman
Cc: Baruch Siach, Geert Uytterhoeven, Neil Armstrong, Viresh Kumar,
Linus Walleij, Daniel Tang, Jamie Iles, Krzysztof Adamski,
Alexander Shiyan, Russell King - ARM Linux, Wei Xu,
Oleksij Rempel, Uwe Kleine-König, Marc Gonzalez,
Hans Ulli Kroll, Alex Elder, Steven Rostedt, Vladimir Zapolskiy,
Lubomir Rintel, Krzysztof Halasa, Koen Vandeputte,
Leizhen (ThunderTown),
Linux ARM, Barry Song, Thomas Bogendoerfer, Yoshinori Sato,
Jonas Jensen, Hartley Sweeten, Mark Salter, Shawn Guo
Hi Arnd!
On 1/17/21 11:56 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> I'd be happy to drop any QS20/21 code we have, but I'm not convinced
>> dropping QS22 is a good trade off.
>
> Right, I agree that there is little to gain from dropping QS20/21, the
> only files that I see this would impact are
>
> arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spider-pci.c
> arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spider-pic.c
> drivers/net/ethernet/toshiba/spider_net*
>
> Dropping all of native (as opposed to PS3 hypervisor based) Cell support
> would be a useful cleanup I think, but not as long as you still use it.
I'm very glad to hear that. Cell is such a unique and interesting architecture
that it would be a shame if it was no longer supported by the Linux kernel.
I would really like to try Debian on these machines one day.
Adrian
--
.''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' : Debian Developer - glaubitz@debian.org
`. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de
`- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [v2] Old platforms: bring out your dead
2021-01-17 10:56 ` Arnd Bergmann
2021-01-17 13:26 ` John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
@ 2021-01-21 11:58 ` Michael Ellerman
2021-01-21 12:51 ` Arnd Bergmann
1 sibling, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: Michael Ellerman @ 2021-01-21 11:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnd Bergmann
Cc: Baruch Siach, Geert Uytterhoeven, Neil Armstrong, Viresh Kumar,
Linus Walleij, Leizhen (ThunderTown),
Daniel Tang, Jamie Iles, Krzysztof Adamski, Alexander Shiyan,
Russell King - ARM Linux, Wei Xu, Oleksij Rempel, Alex Elder,
Marc Gonzalez, Hans Ulli Kroll, Uwe Kleine-König,
Steven Rostedt, Vladimir Zapolskiy, Lubomir Rintel,
Krzysztof Halasa, Koen Vandeputte, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz,
Linux ARM, Barry Song, Thomas Bogendoerfer, Yoshinori Sato,
Geoff Levand, Jonas Jensen, Hartley Sweeten, Mark Salter,
Shawn Guo
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> writes:
> On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at 11:33 AM Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> wrote:
>> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> writes:
>> > On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 9:37 PM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
>> > <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hello Arnd!
>> >>
>> >> > * No objection to removing arch/powerpc/platforms/cell that I
>> >> > had mentioned I plan to do.
>> >>
>> >> Does this affect the capability to run Linux on the PS3?
>> >>
>> >> If yes, it would be great if it could stay as the PS3 is a rather
>> >> widely used platform although you certainly won't find any PS3
>> >> users on the LKML.
>> >
>> > No, as I wrote in the initial email, I'm planning to move the things
>> > (like spufs) that are shared with PS3 into arch/powerpc/platforms/ps3
>> > and remove the parts that are only used on the IBM blades.
>>
>> As I said a while back, I'm not convinced that's a good idea.
>>
>> The only way I have of testing cell is using a QS22, I don't have a PS3
>> capable of running Linux these days. I worry that if I can't test cell
>> at all then the PS3 support will bit rot.
>
> Fair enough. I must have missed your previous reply and expected
> that your QS22 had stopped being operational years ago and that
> there were already zero machines getting kernel updates.
No worries, we all get lots of email :)
So far that QS22 is still going OK with no signs of imminent failure.
> Are you aware of any other users?
No.
I can think of one spufs patch ~year ago that came from someone I assume
is a real Cell user, but otherwise it's pretty much only Geoff that ever
sends Cell/PS3 patches.
>> I know Geoff tests PS3, but that seems sporadic, I don't think he tests
>> linux-next every day.
>>
>> I also don't think the cell blade support is really causing much in the
>> way of maintenance overhead. The thing that's causing work is spufs, and
>> that would remain either way.
>>
>> I'd be happy to drop any QS20/21 code we have, but I'm not convinced
>> dropping QS22 is a good trade off.
>
> Right, I agree that there is little to gain from dropping QS20/21, the
> only files that I see this would impact are
>
> arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spider-pci.c
> arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spider-pic.c
> drivers/net/ethernet/toshiba/spider_net*
>
> Dropping all of native (as opposed to PS3 hypervisor based) Cell support
> would be a useful cleanup I think, but not as long as you still use it.
I would still be happy to drop QS20/21, it's still a few thousand lines
of code, and hasn't been tested for years.
I think it might also let us clean up some of our IO_WORKAROUNDS stuff.
But I agree it's much less of an obvious maintenance win than dropping
all of the native code.
cheers
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [v2] Old platforms: bring out your dead
2021-01-21 11:58 ` Michael Ellerman
@ 2021-01-21 12:51 ` Arnd Bergmann
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2021-01-21 12:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michael Ellerman
Cc: Baruch Siach, Geert Uytterhoeven, Neil Armstrong, Viresh Kumar,
Linus Walleij, Leizhen (ThunderTown),
Daniel Tang, Jamie Iles, Krzysztof Adamski, Alexander Shiyan,
Russell King - ARM Linux, Wei Xu, Oleksij Rempel, Alex Elder,
Marc Gonzalez, Hans Ulli Kroll, Uwe Kleine-König,
Steven Rostedt, Vladimir Zapolskiy, Lubomir Rintel,
Krzysztof Halasa, Koen Vandeputte, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz,
Linux ARM, Barry Song, Thomas Bogendoerfer, Yoshinori Sato,
Geoff Levand, Jonas Jensen, Hartley Sweeten, Mark Salter,
Shawn Guo
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 12:58 PM Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> wrote:
> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> writes:
> > On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at 11:33 AM Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> wrote:
> > Right, I agree that there is little to gain from dropping QS20/21, the
> > only files that I see this would impact are
> >
> > arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spider-pci.c
> > arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spider-pic.c
> > drivers/net/ethernet/toshiba/spider_net*
> >
> > Dropping all of native (as opposed to PS3 hypervisor based) Cell support
> > would be a useful cleanup I think, but not as long as you still use it.
>
> I would still be happy to drop QS20/21, it's still a few thousand lines
> of code, and hasn't been tested for years.
>
> I think it might also let us clean up some of our IO_WORKAROUNDS stuff.
>
> But I agree it's much less of an obvious maintenance win than dropping
> all of the native code.
Good point about the IO_WORKAROUNDS! This is something that may
come up again if we manage to get arch/arm/mach-ixp4xx converted
to use a common kernel. This one also needs indirect MMIO, so at that
point, we could steal the code from powerpc and put it into common
code, but then drop the Cell version.
Arnd
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Old platforms: bring out your dead
@ 2021-01-08 22:55 Arnd Bergmann
2021-01-13 16:14 ` [v2] " Arnd Bergmann
0 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2021-01-08 22:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linux ARM, Linux Kernel Mailing List
Cc: Krzysztof Adamski, Oleksij Rempel, Baruch Siach,
Russell King - ARM Linux, Daniel Tang, Uwe Kleine-König,
Jamie Iles, Barry Song, Viresh Kumar, Linus Walleij,
Jonas Jensen, Marc Gonzalez, Hartley Sweeten, Lubomir Rintel,
Neil Armstrong, Shawn Guo, Alex Elder, Alexander Shiyan,
Koen Vandeputte, Hans Ulli Kroll, Vladimir Zapolskiy, Wei Xu,
Steven Rostedt, Yoshinori Sato, Mark Salter, Michael Ellerman,
Geert Uytterhoeven, Thomas Bogendoerfer
After v5.10 was officially declared an LTS kernel, I had a look around
the Arm platforms that look like they have not seen any patches from
their maintainers or users that are actually running the hardware for
at least five years (2015 or earlier). I made some statistics and lists
for my lwn.net article last year [1], so I'd thought I'd share a summary
here for discussion about what we should remove. As I found three
years ago when I removed several CPU architectures, it makes sense
to do this in bulk, to simplify a scripted search for device drivers, header
files and Kconfig options that become unused in the process.
This is probably a mix of platforms that are completely unused and
those that just work, but I have no good way of knowing which one
it is. Without hearing back about these, I'd propose removing all of
these:
* asm9260 -- added in 2014, no notable changes after 2015
* axxia -- added in 2014, no notable changes after 2015
* bcm/kona -- added in 2013, no notable changes after 2014
* digicolor -- added in 2014, no notable changes after 2015
* dove -- added in 2009, obsoleted by mach-mvebu in 2015
* efm32 -- added in 2011, first Cortex-M, no notable changes after 2013
* nspire -- added in 2013, no notable changes after 2015
* picoxcell -- added in 2011, already queued for removal
* prima2 -- added in 20111, no notable changes since 2015
* spear -- added in 2010, no notable changes since 2015
* tango -- added in 2015, sporadic changes until 2017, but abandoned
* u300 -- added in 2009, no notable changes since 2013
* vt8500 -- added in 2010, no notable changes since 2014
* zx --added in 2015 for both 32, 2017 for 64 bit, no notable changes
If any of the above are not dead yet[2], please let me know,
and we'll keep them.
Then there are ARM platforms that are old but have still seen some work
in the past years. If I hear nothing, these will all stay, but if maintainers
may want to drop them anyway, I can help with that:
* clps711x -- prehistoric, converted to multiplatform+DT in 2016, no
changes since
* cns3xxx -- added in 2010, last fixed in 2019, probably no users left
* ep93xx -- added in 2006, LinusW still working on it, any users left?
* footbridge -- added in prehistory, stable since ~2013, rmk and LinusW have one
* gemini -- added in 2009, LinusW still working on it
* hisi (hip01/hip05) -- servers added in 2013, replaced with arm64 in 2016
* highbank -- added in 2011, no changes after 2015, but Andre still uses it
* iop32x -- added in 2006, no notable changes other than my cleanup, but
I think there are still users
* ixp4xx -- prehistoric, but LinusW and I are still working on it
* lpc18xx -- added in 2015, new dts in 2018, but few other changes
* lpc32xx -- added in 2010, multiplatform 2019, hardware is EOL
* mmp -- added in 2009, DT support is active, but board files might go
* moxart -- added in 2013, last Tested-by in 2017
* mv78xx0 -- added in 2008, mostly stale but still users
(https://github.com/1000001101000/Debian_on_Buffalo)
* nomadik -- added in 2009, LinusW keeps fixing it, probably no other users
* oxnas -- added in 2016, but already old then, few changes later
* pxa -- prehistoric, but a few boards may still have users
* rpc -- prehistoric, but I think Russell still uses his machine
* sa1100 -- prehistoric, but rmk and LinusW sporadically working in it
I also looked at non-ARM platforms while preparing for my article. Some of
these look like they are no longer actively maintained or used, but I'm not
doing anything about those unless the maintainers would like me to:
* h8300: Steven Rostedt has repeatedly asked about it to be removed
or fixed in 2020 with no reply. This was killed before in 2013, added back
in 2015 but has been mostly stale again since 2016
* c6x: Added in 2011, this has seen very few updates since, but
Mark still Acks patches when they come. Like most other DSP platforms,
the model of running Linux on a DSP appears to have been obsoleted
by using Linux on ARM with on-chip DSP cores running bare-metal code.
* sparc/sun4m: A patch for removing 32-bit Sun sparc support (not LEON)
is currently under review
* powerpc/cell: I'm the maintainer and I promised to send a patch to remove it.
it's in my backlog but I will get to it. This is separate from PS3,
which is actively
maintained and used; spufs will move to ps3
* powerpc/chrp (32-bit rs6000, pegasos2): last updated in 2009
* powerpc/amigaone: last updated in 2009
* powerpc/maple: last updated in 2011
* m68k/{apollo,hp300,sun3,q40} these are all presumably dead and have not
seen updates in many years (atari/amiga/mac and coldfire are very much
alive)
* mips/jazz: last updated in 2007
* mips/cobalt: last updated in 2010
There might be some value in dropping old CPU support on architectures
and platforms that are almost exclusively used with more modern CPUs.
If there are only few users, those can still keep using v5.10 or v5.4 stable
kernels for a few more years. Again, I'm not doing anything about them,
except mention them since I did the research.
These are the oldest one by architecture, and they may have reached
their best-served-by-date:
* 80486SX/DX: 80386 CPUs were dropped in 2012, and there are
indications that 486 have no users either on recent kernels.
There is still the Vortex86 family of SoCs, and the oldest of those were
486SX-class, but all the modern ones are 586-class.
* Alpha 2106x: First generation that lacks some of the later features.
Since all Alphas are ancient by now, it's hard to tell whether these have
any fewer users.
* IA64 Merced: first generation Itanium (2001) was quickly replaced by
Itanium II in 2002.
* MIPS R3000/TX39xx: 32-bit MIPS-II generation, mostly superseded by
64-bit MIPS-III (R4000 and higher) starting in 1991. arch/mips still
supports these in DECstation and Toshiba Txx9, but it appears that most
of those machines are of the 64-bit kind. Later MIPS32 such as 4Kc and
later are rather different and widely used.
* PowerPC 601 (from 1992) just got removed, later 60x, 4xx, 8xx etc
are apparently all still used.
* SuperH SH-2: We discussed removing SH-2 (not J2 or SH-4)
support in the past, I don't think there were any objections, but
nobody submitted a patch.
* 68000/68328 (Dragonball): these are less capable than the
68020+ or the Coldfire MCF5xxx line and similar to the 68360
that was removed in 2016.
Arnd
[1] https://lwn.net/Articles/838807/
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jdf5EXo6I68
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [v2] Old platforms: bring out your dead
2021-01-08 22:55 Arnd Bergmann
@ 2021-01-13 16:14 ` Arnd Bergmann
2021-01-13 19:00 ` Krzysztof Hałasa
2021-01-15 7:08 ` Wei Xu
0 siblings, 2 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2021-01-13 16:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linux ARM, Linux Kernel Mailing List
Cc: Krzysztof Adamski, Oleksij Rempel, Baruch Siach,
Russell King - ARM Linux, Daniel Tang, Uwe Kleine-König,
Jamie Iles, Barry Song, Viresh Kumar, Linus Walleij,
Jonas Jensen, Marc Gonzalez, Hartley Sweeten, Lubomir Rintel,
Neil Armstrong, Shawn Guo, Alex Elder, Alexander Shiyan,
Koen Vandeputte, Hans Ulli Kroll, Vladimir Zapolskiy, Wei Xu,
Steven Rostedt, Yoshinori Sato, Mark Salter, Michael Ellerman,
Geert Uytterhoeven, Thomas Bogendoerfer, Tony Prisk,
Krzysztof Halasa, Leizhen (ThunderTown)
On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 11:55 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> wrote:
Just to catch up on the replies I received on my initial email, here
is the updated status of all the Arm platforms I listed earlier, thanks
for everyone that contributed information on these platforms!
These platforms were listed as likely unused and are now going to
be kept around, as we wait for work on them to resume:
* axxia -- added in 2014, no notable changes after 2015
(Alexander Sverdlin has patches and volunteered as a maintainer)
* bcm/kona -- added in 2013, no notable changes after 2014
(Found activity in PostmarketOS, waiting for usptreaming)
* digicolor -- added in 2014, no notable changes after 2015
(Baruch still uses it, no changes needed)
* dove -- added in 2009, obsoleted by mach-mvebu in 2015
(Russell still has patches for cubox, we might remove the other
boards that are converted to DT though)
* nspire -- added in 2013, no notable changes after 2015
(Fabian and Daniel confirmed this is alive and well, more
hardware support is planned)
* spear -- added in 2010, no notable changes since 2015
(My mistake in reading the changelog, should have been
on the second list. The platform is still active, and Mattias
Wallin plans to send more hardware support and cleanup
patches)
These platforms are confirmed to be dead upstream, and are going to
be removed:
* efm32 -- added in 2011, first Cortex-M, no notable changes after 2013
* picoxcell -- added in 2011, already queued for removal
* prima2 -- added in 20111, no notable changes since 2015
* tango -- added in 2015, sporadic changes until 2017, but abandoned
* u300 -- added in 2009, no notable changes since 2013
* zx --added in 2015 for both 32, 2017 for 64 bit, no notable changes
No reply yet, still planning for removal. Oleksij and Tony, please
confirm this is ok or let us know if we should keep them:
* asm9260 -- added in 2014, no notable changes after 2015
* vt8500 -- added in 2010, no notable changes since 2014
These were on the original list of platforms that are likely still
maintained and used despite their age, and I received a
confirmation that this is true (some of them off-list)
* clps711x -- prehistoric, converted to multiplatform+DT in 2016
* ep93xx -- added in 2006, LinusW still working on it, any users left?
* footbridge -- added in prehistory, stable since ~2013, rmk and LinusW have one
* gemini -- added in 2009, LinusW still working on it
* highbank -- added in 2011, no changes after 2015, but Andre still uses it
* iop32x -- added in 2006, no notable changes other than my cleanup, still used
* ixp4xx -- prehistoric, but LinusW and I are still working on it
* lpc32xx -- added in 2010, multiplatform 2019, hardware is EOL
* nomadik -- added in 2009, LinusW keeps fixing it, probably no other users
* orion5x -- DT support still active, board files support to get reviewed
for removal and conversion to DT individually
* oxnas -- added in 2016, but already old then, few changes later
* pxa -- prehistoric, but a few boards may still have users
* rpc -- prehistoric, but I think Russell still uses his machine
* sa1100 -- prehistoric, but rmk and LinusW sporadically working in it
For these I received no reply yet. Again, these will stay for the moment
unless I get a reply, but if anyone has more information, please reply
here to document the status (adding a few more people to Cc):
* mmp -- added in 2009, DT support is active, but board files might go
* cns3xxx -- added in 2010, last fixed in 2019, probably no users left
* hisi (hip01/hip05) -- servers added in 2013, replaced with arm64 in 2016
* lpc18xx -- added in 2015, new dts in 2018, but few other changes
* moxart -- added in 2013, last Tested-by in 2017
* mv78xx0 -- added in 2008, mostly stale but still users
(https://github.com/1000001101000/Debian_on_Buffalo)
For the non-Arm platforms I listed, little has changed:
* Thomas Bogendoerfer confirms that he all the MIPS platforms and
the R3000 CPU are still in active use
* Mark Salter steps down as the maintainer for C6x and the architecture
will be removed
* No objection to removing arch/powerpc/platforms/cell that I
had mentioned I plan to do.
* For the other architectures, a couple of users replied, but no
architecture maintainer added any information, so I won't take
any action.
Arnd
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [v2] Old platforms: bring out your dead
2021-01-13 16:14 ` [v2] " Arnd Bergmann
@ 2021-01-13 19:00 ` Krzysztof Hałasa
2021-01-15 7:08 ` Wei Xu
1 sibling, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Krzysztof Hałasa @ 2021-01-13 19:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnd Bergmann
Cc: Linux ARM, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Krzysztof Adamski,
Oleksij Rempel, Baruch Siach, Russell King - ARM Linux,
Daniel Tang, Uwe Kleine-König, Jamie Iles, Barry Song,
Viresh Kumar, Linus Walleij, Jonas Jensen, Marc Gonzalez,
Hartley Sweeten, Lubomir Rintel, Neil Armstrong, Shawn Guo,
Alex Elder, Alexander Shiyan, Koen Vandeputte, Hans Ulli Kroll,
Vladimir Zapolskiy, Wei Xu, Steven Rostedt, Yoshinori Sato,
Mark Salter, Michael Ellerman, Geert Uytterhoeven,
Thomas Bogendoerfer, Leizhen (ThunderTown)
Arnd,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> writes:
> For these I received no reply yet. Again, these will stay for the moment
> unless I get a reply, but if anyone has more information, please reply
> here to document the status (adding a few more people to Cc):
>
> * cns3xxx -- added in 2010, last fixed in 2019, probably no users left
The following is what I sent to you a week ago. I don't say whether
CNS3xxx support should stay or not, of course.
Subject: Re: cns3xxx PCIe domain support
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> writes:
> For the cns3xxx case, I wonder if anyone actually cares. If
> there are still users, the treewide change would make it trivial
> to set it up right, while backporting would be harder. I noticed
> that openwrt removed cns3xxx support in August with the
> explanation that the platform is not used much anymore,
> and I suspect that any users outside of openwrt stopped updating
> their kernels long ago.
I'm still using CNS3xxx-based Gateworks' boards (Laguna), with some
custom patch set, but the last kernels are over 2 years old. I have some
plan to update, but the probability it will happen very soon is rather
low. I guess I will test and, if needed, fix it when the time comes.
I'm not using them with OpenWrt, though.
They are basically a platform for (the old, parallel, not express)
mini-PCI cards and similar stuff. Nothing connected to the Internet etc.
--
Krzysztof Halasa
Sieć Badawcza Łukasiewicz
Przemysłowy Instytut Automatyki i Pomiarów PIAP
Al. Jerozolimskie 202, 02-486 Warszawa
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [v2] Old platforms: bring out your dead
@ 2021-01-13 19:00 ` Krzysztof Hałasa
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Krzysztof Hałasa @ 2021-01-13 19:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnd Bergmann
Cc: Baruch Siach, Geert Uytterhoeven, Neil Armstrong, Viresh Kumar,
Linus Walleij, Daniel Tang, Jamie Iles, Krzysztof Adamski,
Alexander Shiyan, Michael Ellerman, Russell King - ARM Linux,
Wei Xu, Oleksij Rempel, Alex Elder, Marc Gonzalez,
Hans Ulli Kroll, Uwe Kleine-König, Steven Rostedt,
Vladimir Zapolskiy, Lubomir Rintel, Koen Vandeputte,
Leizhen (ThunderTown),
Linux ARM, Barry Song, Thomas Bogendoerfer, Yoshinori Sato,
Linux Kernel Mailing List, Jonas Jensen, Hartley Sweeten,
Mark Salter, Shawn Guo
Arnd,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> writes:
> For these I received no reply yet. Again, these will stay for the moment
> unless I get a reply, but if anyone has more information, please reply
> here to document the status (adding a few more people to Cc):
>
> * cns3xxx -- added in 2010, last fixed in 2019, probably no users left
The following is what I sent to you a week ago. I don't say whether
CNS3xxx support should stay or not, of course.
Subject: Re: cns3xxx PCIe domain support
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> writes:
> For the cns3xxx case, I wonder if anyone actually cares. If
> there are still users, the treewide change would make it trivial
> to set it up right, while backporting would be harder. I noticed
> that openwrt removed cns3xxx support in August with the
> explanation that the platform is not used much anymore,
> and I suspect that any users outside of openwrt stopped updating
> their kernels long ago.
I'm still using CNS3xxx-based Gateworks' boards (Laguna), with some
custom patch set, but the last kernels are over 2 years old. I have some
plan to update, but the probability it will happen very soon is rather
low. I guess I will test and, if needed, fix it when the time comes.
I'm not using them with OpenWrt, though.
They are basically a platform for (the old, parallel, not express)
mini-PCI cards and similar stuff. Nothing connected to the Internet etc.
--
Krzysztof Halasa
Sieć Badawcza Łukasiewicz
Przemysłowy Instytut Automatyki i Pomiarów PIAP
Al. Jerozolimskie 202, 02-486 Warszawa
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [v2] Old platforms: bring out your dead
2021-01-13 19:00 ` Krzysztof Hałasa
@ 2021-01-14 8:51 ` Arnd Bergmann
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2021-01-14 8:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Krzysztof Hałasa
Cc: Linux ARM, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Krzysztof Adamski,
Oleksij Rempel, Baruch Siach, Russell King - ARM Linux,
Daniel Tang, Uwe Kleine-König, Jamie Iles, Barry Song,
Viresh Kumar, Linus Walleij, Jonas Jensen, Marc Gonzalez,
Hartley Sweeten, Lubomir Rintel, Neil Armstrong, Shawn Guo,
Alex Elder, Alexander Shiyan, Koen Vandeputte, Hans Ulli Kroll,
Vladimir Zapolskiy, Wei Xu, Steven Rostedt, Yoshinori Sato,
Mark Salter, Michael Ellerman, Geert Uytterhoeven,
Thomas Bogendoerfer, Leizhen (ThunderTown)
On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 8:00 PM Krzysztof Hałasa <khalasa@piap.pl> wrote:
> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> writes:
>
> > For these I received no reply yet. Again, these will stay for the moment
> > unless I get a reply, but if anyone has more information, please reply
> > here to document the status (adding a few more people to Cc):
> >
> > * cns3xxx -- added in 2010, last fixed in 2019, probably no users left
>
> The following is what I sent to you a week ago. I don't say whether
> CNS3xxx support should stay or not, of course.
>
> Subject: Re: cns3xxx PCIe domain support
>
> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> writes:
>
> > For the cns3xxx case, I wonder if anyone actually cares. If
> > there are still users, the treewide change would make it trivial
> > to set it up right, while backporting would be harder. I noticed
> > that openwrt removed cns3xxx support in August with the
> > explanation that the platform is not used much anymore,
> > and I suspect that any users outside of openwrt stopped updating
> > their kernels long ago.
>
> I'm still using CNS3xxx-based Gateworks' boards (Laguna), with some
> custom patch set, but the last kernels are over 2 years old. I have some
> plan to update, but the probability it will happen very soon is rather
> low. I guess I will test and, if needed, fix it when the time comes.
>
> I'm not using them with OpenWrt, though.
> They are basically a platform for (the old, parallel, not express)
> mini-PCI cards and similar stuff. Nothing connected to the Internet etc.
Hi Krzysztof,
Thanks for your reply. I think I misremembered it from when you
originally said this in the other thread and thought you meant
you were unlikely to ever do it, not just for doing it soon.
No need to rush things then by removing it prematurely then, but it
might help if you could point to a git tree with your last working patches
in case someone else has a Laguna and wants to update it to a more
recent kernel before you do.
Arnd
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [v2] Old platforms: bring out your dead
@ 2021-01-14 8:51 ` Arnd Bergmann
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2021-01-14 8:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Krzysztof Hałasa
Cc: Baruch Siach, Geert Uytterhoeven, Neil Armstrong, Viresh Kumar,
Linus Walleij, Daniel Tang, Jamie Iles, Krzysztof Adamski,
Alexander Shiyan, Michael Ellerman, Russell King - ARM Linux,
Wei Xu, Oleksij Rempel, Alex Elder, Marc Gonzalez,
Hans Ulli Kroll, Uwe Kleine-König, Steven Rostedt,
Vladimir Zapolskiy, Lubomir Rintel, Koen Vandeputte,
Leizhen (ThunderTown),
Linux ARM, Barry Song, Thomas Bogendoerfer, Yoshinori Sato,
Linux Kernel Mailing List, Jonas Jensen, Hartley Sweeten,
Mark Salter, Shawn Guo
On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 8:00 PM Krzysztof Hałasa <khalasa@piap.pl> wrote:
> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> writes:
>
> > For these I received no reply yet. Again, these will stay for the moment
> > unless I get a reply, but if anyone has more information, please reply
> > here to document the status (adding a few more people to Cc):
> >
> > * cns3xxx -- added in 2010, last fixed in 2019, probably no users left
>
> The following is what I sent to you a week ago. I don't say whether
> CNS3xxx support should stay or not, of course.
>
> Subject: Re: cns3xxx PCIe domain support
>
> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> writes:
>
> > For the cns3xxx case, I wonder if anyone actually cares. If
> > there are still users, the treewide change would make it trivial
> > to set it up right, while backporting would be harder. I noticed
> > that openwrt removed cns3xxx support in August with the
> > explanation that the platform is not used much anymore,
> > and I suspect that any users outside of openwrt stopped updating
> > their kernels long ago.
>
> I'm still using CNS3xxx-based Gateworks' boards (Laguna), with some
> custom patch set, but the last kernels are over 2 years old. I have some
> plan to update, but the probability it will happen very soon is rather
> low. I guess I will test and, if needed, fix it when the time comes.
>
> I'm not using them with OpenWrt, though.
> They are basically a platform for (the old, parallel, not express)
> mini-PCI cards and similar stuff. Nothing connected to the Internet etc.
Hi Krzysztof,
Thanks for your reply. I think I misremembered it from when you
originally said this in the other thread and thought you meant
you were unlikely to ever do it, not just for doing it soon.
No need to rush things then by removing it prematurely then, but it
might help if you could point to a git tree with your last working patches
in case someone else has a Laguna and wants to update it to a more
recent kernel before you do.
Arnd
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [v2] Old platforms: bring out your dead
2021-01-13 16:14 ` [v2] " Arnd Bergmann
@ 2021-01-15 7:08 ` Wei Xu
2021-01-15 7:08 ` Wei Xu
1 sibling, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Wei Xu @ 2021-01-15 7:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnd Bergmann, Linux ARM, Linux Kernel Mailing List
Cc: Krzysztof Adamski, Oleksij Rempel, Baruch Siach,
Russell King - ARM Linux, Daniel Tang, Uwe Kleine-König,
Jamie Iles, Barry Song, Viresh Kumar, Linus Walleij,
Jonas Jensen, Marc Gonzalez, Hartley Sweeten, Lubomir Rintel,
Neil Armstrong, Shawn Guo, Alex Elder, Alexander Shiyan,
Koen Vandeputte, Hans Ulli Kroll, Vladimir Zapolskiy,
Steven Rostedt, Yoshinori Sato, Mark Salter, Michael Ellerman,
Geert Uytterhoeven, Thomas Bogendoerfer, Tony Prisk,
Krzysztof Halasa, Leizhen (ThunderTown)
Hi Arnd,
On 2021/1/14 0:14, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 11:55 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Just to catch up on the replies I received on my initial email, here
> is the updated status of all the Arm platforms I listed earlier, thanks
> for everyone that contributed information on these platforms!
>
> These platforms were listed as likely unused and are now going to
> be kept around, as we wait for work on them to resume:
>
> * axxia -- added in 2014, no notable changes after 2015
> (Alexander Sverdlin has patches and volunteered as a maintainer)
> * bcm/kona -- added in 2013, no notable changes after 2014
> (Found activity in PostmarketOS, waiting for usptreaming)
> * digicolor -- added in 2014, no notable changes after 2015
> (Baruch still uses it, no changes needed)
> * dove -- added in 2009, obsoleted by mach-mvebu in 2015
> (Russell still has patches for cubox, we might remove the other
> boards that are converted to DT though)
> * nspire -- added in 2013, no notable changes after 2015
> (Fabian and Daniel confirmed this is alive and well, more
> hardware support is planned)
> * spear -- added in 2010, no notable changes since 2015
> (My mistake in reading the changelog, should have been
> on the second list. The platform is still active, and Mattias
> Wallin plans to send more hardware support and cleanup
> patches)
>
> These platforms are confirmed to be dead upstream, and are going to
> be removed:
>
> * efm32 -- added in 2011, first Cortex-M, no notable changes after 2013
> * picoxcell -- added in 2011, already queued for removal
> * prima2 -- added in 20111, no notable changes since 2015
> * tango -- added in 2015, sporadic changes until 2017, but abandoned
> * u300 -- added in 2009, no notable changes since 2013
> * zx --added in 2015 for both 32, 2017 for 64 bit, no notable changes
>
> No reply yet, still planning for removal. Oleksij and Tony, please
> confirm this is ok or let us know if we should keep them:
>
> * asm9260 -- added in 2014, no notable changes after 2015
> * vt8500 -- added in 2010, no notable changes since 2014
>
> These were on the original list of platforms that are likely still
> maintained and used despite their age, and I received a
> confirmation that this is true (some of them off-list)
>
> * clps711x -- prehistoric, converted to multiplatform+DT in 2016
> * ep93xx -- added in 2006, LinusW still working on it, any users left?
> * footbridge -- added in prehistory, stable since ~2013, rmk and LinusW have one
> * gemini -- added in 2009, LinusW still working on it
> * highbank -- added in 2011, no changes after 2015, but Andre still uses it
> * iop32x -- added in 2006, no notable changes other than my cleanup, still used
> * ixp4xx -- prehistoric, but LinusW and I are still working on it
> * lpc32xx -- added in 2010, multiplatform 2019, hardware is EOL
> * nomadik -- added in 2009, LinusW keeps fixing it, probably no other users
> * orion5x -- DT support still active, board files support to get reviewed
> for removal and conversion to DT individually
> * oxnas -- added in 2016, but already old then, few changes later
> * pxa -- prehistoric, but a few boards may still have users
> * rpc -- prehistoric, but I think Russell still uses his machine
> * sa1100 -- prehistoric, but rmk and LinusW sporadically working in it
>
> For these I received no reply yet. Again, these will stay for the moment
> unless I get a reply, but if anyone has more information, please reply
> here to document the status (adding a few more people to Cc):
>
> * mmp -- added in 2009, DT support is active, but board files might go
> * cns3xxx -- added in 2010, last fixed in 2019, probably no users left
> * hisi (hip01/hip05) -- servers added in 2013, replaced with arm64 in 2016
I think it is OK to drop the support of the hip01(arm32) and hip05(arm64).
Could you also help to drop the support of the hip04(arm32) which I think nobody use as well?
Thanks!
Best Regards,
Wei
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [v2] Old platforms: bring out your dead
@ 2021-01-15 7:08 ` Wei Xu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Wei Xu @ 2021-01-15 7:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnd Bergmann, Linux ARM, Linux Kernel Mailing List
Cc: Baruch Siach, Geert Uytterhoeven, Neil Armstrong, Viresh Kumar,
Linus Walleij, Daniel Tang, Jamie Iles, Krzysztof Adamski,
Alexander Shiyan, Michael Ellerman, Russell King - ARM Linux,
Oleksij Rempel, Alex Elder, Marc Gonzalez, Hans Ulli Kroll,
Uwe Kleine-König, Steven Rostedt, Vladimir Zapolskiy,
Lubomir Rintel, Krzysztof Halasa, Koen Vandeputte,
Leizhen (ThunderTown),
Barry Song, Thomas Bogendoerfer, Yoshinori Sato, Jonas Jensen,
Tony Prisk, Hartley Sweeten, Mark Salter, Shawn Guo
Hi Arnd,
On 2021/1/14 0:14, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 11:55 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Just to catch up on the replies I received on my initial email, here
> is the updated status of all the Arm platforms I listed earlier, thanks
> for everyone that contributed information on these platforms!
>
> These platforms were listed as likely unused and are now going to
> be kept around, as we wait for work on them to resume:
>
> * axxia -- added in 2014, no notable changes after 2015
> (Alexander Sverdlin has patches and volunteered as a maintainer)
> * bcm/kona -- added in 2013, no notable changes after 2014
> (Found activity in PostmarketOS, waiting for usptreaming)
> * digicolor -- added in 2014, no notable changes after 2015
> (Baruch still uses it, no changes needed)
> * dove -- added in 2009, obsoleted by mach-mvebu in 2015
> (Russell still has patches for cubox, we might remove the other
> boards that are converted to DT though)
> * nspire -- added in 2013, no notable changes after 2015
> (Fabian and Daniel confirmed this is alive and well, more
> hardware support is planned)
> * spear -- added in 2010, no notable changes since 2015
> (My mistake in reading the changelog, should have been
> on the second list. The platform is still active, and Mattias
> Wallin plans to send more hardware support and cleanup
> patches)
>
> These platforms are confirmed to be dead upstream, and are going to
> be removed:
>
> * efm32 -- added in 2011, first Cortex-M, no notable changes after 2013
> * picoxcell -- added in 2011, already queued for removal
> * prima2 -- added in 20111, no notable changes since 2015
> * tango -- added in 2015, sporadic changes until 2017, but abandoned
> * u300 -- added in 2009, no notable changes since 2013
> * zx --added in 2015 for both 32, 2017 for 64 bit, no notable changes
>
> No reply yet, still planning for removal. Oleksij and Tony, please
> confirm this is ok or let us know if we should keep them:
>
> * asm9260 -- added in 2014, no notable changes after 2015
> * vt8500 -- added in 2010, no notable changes since 2014
>
> These were on the original list of platforms that are likely still
> maintained and used despite their age, and I received a
> confirmation that this is true (some of them off-list)
>
> * clps711x -- prehistoric, converted to multiplatform+DT in 2016
> * ep93xx -- added in 2006, LinusW still working on it, any users left?
> * footbridge -- added in prehistory, stable since ~2013, rmk and LinusW have one
> * gemini -- added in 2009, LinusW still working on it
> * highbank -- added in 2011, no changes after 2015, but Andre still uses it
> * iop32x -- added in 2006, no notable changes other than my cleanup, still used
> * ixp4xx -- prehistoric, but LinusW and I are still working on it
> * lpc32xx -- added in 2010, multiplatform 2019, hardware is EOL
> * nomadik -- added in 2009, LinusW keeps fixing it, probably no other users
> * orion5x -- DT support still active, board files support to get reviewed
> for removal and conversion to DT individually
> * oxnas -- added in 2016, but already old then, few changes later
> * pxa -- prehistoric, but a few boards may still have users
> * rpc -- prehistoric, but I think Russell still uses his machine
> * sa1100 -- prehistoric, but rmk and LinusW sporadically working in it
>
> For these I received no reply yet. Again, these will stay for the moment
> unless I get a reply, but if anyone has more information, please reply
> here to document the status (adding a few more people to Cc):
>
> * mmp -- added in 2009, DT support is active, but board files might go
> * cns3xxx -- added in 2010, last fixed in 2019, probably no users left
> * hisi (hip01/hip05) -- servers added in 2013, replaced with arm64 in 2016
I think it is OK to drop the support of the hip01(arm32) and hip05(arm64).
Could you also help to drop the support of the hip04(arm32) which I think nobody use as well?
Thanks!
Best Regards,
Wei
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [v2] Old platforms: bring out your dead
2021-01-15 7:08 ` Wei Xu
@ 2021-01-15 9:26 ` Arnd Bergmann
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2021-01-15 9:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Wei Xu
Cc: Linux ARM, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Krzysztof Adamski,
Oleksij Rempel, Baruch Siach, Russell King - ARM Linux,
Daniel Tang, Uwe Kleine-König, Jamie Iles, Barry Song,
Viresh Kumar, Linus Walleij, Jonas Jensen, Marc Gonzalez,
Hartley Sweeten, Lubomir Rintel, Neil Armstrong, Shawn Guo,
Alex Elder, Alexander Shiyan, Koen Vandeputte, Hans Ulli Kroll,
Vladimir Zapolskiy, Steven Rostedt, Yoshinori Sato, Mark Salter,
Michael Ellerman, Geert Uytterhoeven, Thomas Bogendoerfer,
Tony Prisk, Krzysztof Halasa, Leizhen (ThunderTown)
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 8:08 AM Wei Xu <xuwei5@hisilicon.com> wrote:
> On 2021/1/14 0:14, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 11:55 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> wrote:
> > * mmp -- added in 2009, DT support is active, but board files might go
> > * cns3xxx -- added in 2010, last fixed in 2019, probably no users left
> > * hisi (hip01/hip05) -- servers added in 2013, replaced with arm64 in 2016
>
> I think it is OK to drop the support of the hip01(arm32) and hip05(arm64).
> Could you also help to drop the support of the hip04(arm32) which I think nobody use as well?
Thank you for your reply! I actually meant to write hip04 instead of hip05,
so I was only asking about the two 32-bit targets. I would expect that
hip05 still has a few users, but wouldn't mind removing that as well if you
are sure there are none.
Since Zhen Lei is starting to upstream Kunpeng506 and Kunpeng509
support, can you clarify how much reuse of IP blocks there is between
hip04 and those? In particular, hip04 has custom code for (at least)
platmcpm, clk, irqchip, ethernet, and hw_rng, probably more as those
were only the ones I see on a quick grep.
If we remove hip04, should we remove all these drivers right away,
or keep some of them around?
Arnd
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [v2] Old platforms: bring out your dead
@ 2021-01-15 9:26 ` Arnd Bergmann
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2021-01-15 9:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Wei Xu
Cc: Baruch Siach, Geert Uytterhoeven, Neil Armstrong, Viresh Kumar,
Linus Walleij, Daniel Tang, Jamie Iles, Krzysztof Adamski,
Alexander Shiyan, Michael Ellerman, Russell King - ARM Linux,
Oleksij Rempel, Alex Elder, Marc Gonzalez, Hans Ulli Kroll,
Uwe Kleine-König, Steven Rostedt, Vladimir Zapolskiy,
Lubomir Rintel, Krzysztof Halasa, Koen Vandeputte,
Leizhen (ThunderTown),
Linux ARM, Barry Song, Thomas Bogendoerfer, Yoshinori Sato,
Linux Kernel Mailing List, Jonas Jensen, Tony Prisk,
Hartley Sweeten, Mark Salter, Shawn Guo
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 8:08 AM Wei Xu <xuwei5@hisilicon.com> wrote:
> On 2021/1/14 0:14, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 11:55 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> wrote:
> > * mmp -- added in 2009, DT support is active, but board files might go
> > * cns3xxx -- added in 2010, last fixed in 2019, probably no users left
> > * hisi (hip01/hip05) -- servers added in 2013, replaced with arm64 in 2016
>
> I think it is OK to drop the support of the hip01(arm32) and hip05(arm64).
> Could you also help to drop the support of the hip04(arm32) which I think nobody use as well?
Thank you for your reply! I actually meant to write hip04 instead of hip05,
so I was only asking about the two 32-bit targets. I would expect that
hip05 still has a few users, but wouldn't mind removing that as well if you
are sure there are none.
Since Zhen Lei is starting to upstream Kunpeng506 and Kunpeng509
support, can you clarify how much reuse of IP blocks there is between
hip04 and those? In particular, hip04 has custom code for (at least)
platmcpm, clk, irqchip, ethernet, and hw_rng, probably more as those
were only the ones I see on a quick grep.
If we remove hip04, should we remove all these drivers right away,
or keep some of them around?
Arnd
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [v2] Old platforms: bring out your dead
2021-01-15 9:26 ` Arnd Bergmann
@ 2021-01-15 11:09 ` Leizhen (ThunderTown)
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Leizhen (ThunderTown) @ 2021-01-15 11:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnd Bergmann, Wei Xu
Cc: Linux ARM, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Krzysztof Adamski,
Oleksij Rempel, Baruch Siach, Russell King - ARM Linux,
Daniel Tang, Uwe Kleine-König, Jamie Iles, Barry Song,
Viresh Kumar, Linus Walleij, Jonas Jensen, Marc Gonzalez,
Hartley Sweeten, Lubomir Rintel, Neil Armstrong, Shawn Guo,
Alex Elder, Alexander Shiyan, Koen Vandeputte, Hans Ulli Kroll,
Vladimir Zapolskiy, Steven Rostedt, Yoshinori Sato, Mark Salter,
Michael Ellerman, Geert Uytterhoeven, Thomas Bogendoerfer,
Tony Prisk, Krzysztof Halasa
On 2021/1/15 17:26, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 8:08 AM Wei Xu <xuwei5@hisilicon.com> wrote:
>> On 2021/1/14 0:14, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 11:55 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> wrote:
>>> * mmp -- added in 2009, DT support is active, but board files might go
>>> * cns3xxx -- added in 2010, last fixed in 2019, probably no users left
>>> * hisi (hip01/hip05) -- servers added in 2013, replaced with arm64 in 2016
>>
>> I think it is OK to drop the support of the hip01(arm32) and hip05(arm64).
>> Could you also help to drop the support of the hip04(arm32) which I think nobody use as well?
>
> Thank you for your reply! I actually meant to write hip04 instead of hip05,
> so I was only asking about the two 32-bit targets. I would expect that
> hip05 still has a few users, but wouldn't mind removing that as well if you
> are sure there are none.
>
> Since Zhen Lei is starting to upstream Kunpeng506 and Kunpeng509
> support, can you clarify how much reuse of IP blocks there is between
> hip04 and those? In particular, hip04 has custom code for (at least)
> platmcpm, clk, irqchip, ethernet, and hw_rng, probably more as those
> were only the ones I see on a quick grep.
>
> If we remove hip04, should we remove all these drivers right away,
> or keep some of them around?
I think the drivers should be kept. Currently, at least hip04_eth.c and
irq-hip04.c are used. These drivers were originally written for Hip04, but
the drivers used by other boards maybe similar to them. Therefore, these
drivers are extended without adding new drivers.
>
> Arnd
>
> .
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [v2] Old platforms: bring out your dead
@ 2021-01-15 11:09 ` Leizhen (ThunderTown)
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Leizhen (ThunderTown) @ 2021-01-15 11:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnd Bergmann, Wei Xu
Cc: Baruch Siach, Geert Uytterhoeven, Neil Armstrong, Viresh Kumar,
Linus Walleij, Daniel Tang, Jamie Iles, Krzysztof Adamski,
Alexander Shiyan, Michael Ellerman, Russell King - ARM Linux,
Oleksij Rempel, Alex Elder, Marc Gonzalez, Hans Ulli Kroll,
Uwe Kleine-König, Steven Rostedt, Vladimir Zapolskiy,
Lubomir Rintel, Krzysztof Halasa, Koen Vandeputte, Linux ARM,
Barry Song, Thomas Bogendoerfer, Yoshinori Sato,
Linux Kernel Mailing List, Jonas Jensen, Tony Prisk,
Hartley Sweeten, Mark Salter, Shawn Guo
On 2021/1/15 17:26, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 8:08 AM Wei Xu <xuwei5@hisilicon.com> wrote:
>> On 2021/1/14 0:14, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 11:55 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> wrote:
>>> * mmp -- added in 2009, DT support is active, but board files might go
>>> * cns3xxx -- added in 2010, last fixed in 2019, probably no users left
>>> * hisi (hip01/hip05) -- servers added in 2013, replaced with arm64 in 2016
>>
>> I think it is OK to drop the support of the hip01(arm32) and hip05(arm64).
>> Could you also help to drop the support of the hip04(arm32) which I think nobody use as well?
>
> Thank you for your reply! I actually meant to write hip04 instead of hip05,
> so I was only asking about the two 32-bit targets. I would expect that
> hip05 still has a few users, but wouldn't mind removing that as well if you
> are sure there are none.
>
> Since Zhen Lei is starting to upstream Kunpeng506 and Kunpeng509
> support, can you clarify how much reuse of IP blocks there is between
> hip04 and those? In particular, hip04 has custom code for (at least)
> platmcpm, clk, irqchip, ethernet, and hw_rng, probably more as those
> were only the ones I see on a quick grep.
>
> If we remove hip04, should we remove all these drivers right away,
> or keep some of them around?
I think the drivers should be kept. Currently, at least hip04_eth.c and
irq-hip04.c are used. These drivers were originally written for Hip04, but
the drivers used by other boards maybe similar to them. Therefore, these
drivers are extended without adding new drivers.
>
> Arnd
>
> .
>
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [v2] Old platforms: bring out your dead
2021-01-15 11:09 ` Leizhen (ThunderTown)
@ 2021-01-15 12:04 ` Arnd Bergmann
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2021-01-15 12:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Leizhen (ThunderTown)
Cc: Wei Xu, Linux ARM, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Krzysztof Adamski,
Oleksij Rempel, Baruch Siach, Russell King - ARM Linux,
Daniel Tang, Uwe Kleine-König, Jamie Iles, Barry Song,
Viresh Kumar, Linus Walleij, Jonas Jensen, Marc Gonzalez,
Hartley Sweeten, Lubomir Rintel, Neil Armstrong, Shawn Guo,
Alex Elder, Alexander Shiyan, Koen Vandeputte, Hans Ulli Kroll,
Vladimir Zapolskiy, Steven Rostedt, Yoshinori Sato, Mark Salter,
Michael Ellerman, Geert Uytterhoeven, Thomas Bogendoerfer,
Tony Prisk, Krzysztof Halasa
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 12:09 PM Leizhen (ThunderTown)
<thunder.leizhen@huawei.com> wrote:
> On 2021/1/15 17:26, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 8:08 AM Wei Xu <xuwei5@hisilicon.com> wrote:
> >> On 2021/1/14 0:14, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 11:55 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> wrote:
> >>> * mmp -- added in 2009, DT support is active, but board files might go
> >>> * cns3xxx -- added in 2010, last fixed in 2019, probably no users left
> >>> * hisi (hip01/hip05) -- servers added in 2013, replaced with arm64 in 2016
> >>
> >> I think it is OK to drop the support of the hip01(arm32) and hip05(arm64).
> >> Could you also help to drop the support of the hip04(arm32) which I think nobody use as well?
> >
> > Thank you for your reply! I actually meant to write hip04 instead of hip05,
> > so I was only asking about the two 32-bit targets. I would expect that
> > hip05 still has a few users, but wouldn't mind removing that as well if you
> > are sure there are none.
> >
> > Since Zhen Lei is starting to upstream Kunpeng506 and Kunpeng509
> > support, can you clarify how much reuse of IP blocks there is between
> > hip04 and those? In particular, hip04 has custom code for (at least)
> > platmcpm, clk, irqchip, ethernet, and hw_rng, probably more as those
> > were only the ones I see on a quick grep.
> >
> > If we remove hip04, should we remove all these drivers right away,
> > or keep some of them around?
>
> I think the drivers should be kept.
Ok, will do.
> Currently, at least hip04_eth.c and irq-hip04.c are used. These drivers
> were originally written for Hip04, but the drivers used by other boards
> maybe similar to them. Therefore, these drivers are extended without
> adding new drivers.
Right, so the other chips just use compatible="hisilicon,hip04-intc"
etc. in their device trees? Is there a public copy of the dts files
somewhere that I can use for cross-referencing? Sorry if I'm
messing up the timeline for your upstreaming plans.
It might actually be easier to leave hip01 and hip04 in the
tree for the moment until you have upstreamed the other SoC
support, and then we clean up by removing the unused bits
afterwards. I'll leave it to you both to tell me which way is easier
for you.
Arnd
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [v2] Old platforms: bring out your dead
@ 2021-01-15 12:04 ` Arnd Bergmann
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2021-01-15 12:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Leizhen (ThunderTown)
Cc: Baruch Siach, Geert Uytterhoeven, Neil Armstrong, Viresh Kumar,
Linus Walleij, Daniel Tang, Jamie Iles, Krzysztof Adamski,
Alexander Shiyan, Michael Ellerman, Russell King - ARM Linux,
Wei Xu, Oleksij Rempel, Alex Elder, Marc Gonzalez,
Hans Ulli Kroll, Uwe Kleine-König, Steven Rostedt,
Vladimir Zapolskiy, Lubomir Rintel, Krzysztof Halasa,
Koen Vandeputte, Linux ARM, Barry Song, Thomas Bogendoerfer,
Yoshinori Sato, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Jonas Jensen,
Tony Prisk, Hartley Sweeten, Mark Salter, Shawn Guo
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 12:09 PM Leizhen (ThunderTown)
<thunder.leizhen@huawei.com> wrote:
> On 2021/1/15 17:26, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 8:08 AM Wei Xu <xuwei5@hisilicon.com> wrote:
> >> On 2021/1/14 0:14, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 11:55 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> wrote:
> >>> * mmp -- added in 2009, DT support is active, but board files might go
> >>> * cns3xxx -- added in 2010, last fixed in 2019, probably no users left
> >>> * hisi (hip01/hip05) -- servers added in 2013, replaced with arm64 in 2016
> >>
> >> I think it is OK to drop the support of the hip01(arm32) and hip05(arm64).
> >> Could you also help to drop the support of the hip04(arm32) which I think nobody use as well?
> >
> > Thank you for your reply! I actually meant to write hip04 instead of hip05,
> > so I was only asking about the two 32-bit targets. I would expect that
> > hip05 still has a few users, but wouldn't mind removing that as well if you
> > are sure there are none.
> >
> > Since Zhen Lei is starting to upstream Kunpeng506 and Kunpeng509
> > support, can you clarify how much reuse of IP blocks there is between
> > hip04 and those? In particular, hip04 has custom code for (at least)
> > platmcpm, clk, irqchip, ethernet, and hw_rng, probably more as those
> > were only the ones I see on a quick grep.
> >
> > If we remove hip04, should we remove all these drivers right away,
> > or keep some of them around?
>
> I think the drivers should be kept.
Ok, will do.
> Currently, at least hip04_eth.c and irq-hip04.c are used. These drivers
> were originally written for Hip04, but the drivers used by other boards
> maybe similar to them. Therefore, these drivers are extended without
> adding new drivers.
Right, so the other chips just use compatible="hisilicon,hip04-intc"
etc. in their device trees? Is there a public copy of the dts files
somewhere that I can use for cross-referencing? Sorry if I'm
messing up the timeline for your upstreaming plans.
It might actually be easier to leave hip01 and hip04 in the
tree for the moment until you have upstreamed the other SoC
support, and then we clean up by removing the unused bits
afterwards. I'll leave it to you both to tell me which way is easier
for you.
Arnd
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [v2] Old platforms: bring out your dead
2021-01-15 12:04 ` Arnd Bergmann
@ 2021-01-18 10:46 ` Wei Xu
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Wei Xu @ 2021-01-18 10:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnd Bergmann, Leizhen (ThunderTown)
Cc: Linux ARM, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Krzysztof Adamski,
Oleksij Rempel, Baruch Siach, Russell King - ARM Linux,
Daniel Tang, Uwe Kleine-König, Jamie Iles, Barry Song,
Viresh Kumar, Linus Walleij, Jonas Jensen, Marc Gonzalez,
Hartley Sweeten, Lubomir Rintel, Neil Armstrong, Shawn Guo,
Alex Elder, Alexander Shiyan, Koen Vandeputte, Hans Ulli Kroll,
Vladimir Zapolskiy, Steven Rostedt, Yoshinori Sato, Mark Salter,
Michael Ellerman, Geert Uytterhoeven, Thomas Bogendoerfer,
Tony Prisk, Krzysztof Halasa, xuwei5
Hi Arnd,
On 2021/1/15 20:04, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 12:09 PM Leizhen (ThunderTown)
> <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com> wrote:
>> On 2021/1/15 17:26, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 8:08 AM Wei Xu <xuwei5@hisilicon.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2021/1/14 0:14, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 11:55 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> wrote:
>>>>> * mmp -- added in 2009, DT support is active, but board files might go
>>>>> * cns3xxx -- added in 2010, last fixed in 2019, probably no users left
>>>>> * hisi (hip01/hip05) -- servers added in 2013, replaced with arm64 in 2016
>>>>
>>>> I think it is OK to drop the support of the hip01(arm32) and hip05(arm64).
>>>> Could you also help to drop the support of the hip04(arm32) which I think nobody use as well?
>>>
>>> Thank you for your reply! I actually meant to write hip04 instead of hip05,
>>> so I was only asking about the two 32-bit targets. I would expect that
>>> hip05 still has a few users, but wouldn't mind removing that as well if you
>>> are sure there are none.
>>>
>>> Since Zhen Lei is starting to upstream Kunpeng506 and Kunpeng509
>>> support, can you clarify how much reuse of IP blocks there is between
>>> hip04 and those? In particular, hip04 has custom code for (at least)
>>> platmcpm, clk, irqchip, ethernet, and hw_rng, probably more as those
>>> were only the ones I see on a quick grep.
>>>
>>> If we remove hip04, should we remove all these drivers right away,
>>> or keep some of them around?
>>
>> I think the drivers should be kept.
>
> Ok, will do.
>
>> Currently, at least hip04_eth.c and irq-hip04.c are used. These drivers
>> were originally written for Hip04, but the drivers used by other boards
>> maybe similar to them. Therefore, these drivers are extended without
>> adding new drivers.
>
> Right, so the other chips just use compatible="hisilicon,hip04-intc"
> etc. in their device trees? Is there a public copy of the dts files
> somewhere that I can use for cross-referencing? Sorry if I'm
> messing up the timeline for your upstreaming plans.
>
> It might actually be easier to leave hip01 and hip04 in the
> tree for the moment until you have upstreamed the other SoC
> support, and then we clean up by removing the unused bits
> afterwards. I'll leave it to you both to tell me which way is easier
> for you.
I have aligned with Leizhen and as you suggested it is better to keep them
for the moment.
Thanks!
Best Regards,
Wei
>
> Arnd
> .
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [v2] Old platforms: bring out your dead
@ 2021-01-18 10:46 ` Wei Xu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Wei Xu @ 2021-01-18 10:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnd Bergmann, Leizhen (ThunderTown)
Cc: Baruch Siach, Geert Uytterhoeven, Neil Armstrong, Viresh Kumar,
Linus Walleij, Daniel Tang, Jamie Iles, Krzysztof Adamski,
Alexander Shiyan, Michael Ellerman, Russell King - ARM Linux,
xuwei5, Oleksij Rempel, Alex Elder, Marc Gonzalez,
Hans Ulli Kroll, Uwe Kleine-König, Steven Rostedt,
Vladimir Zapolskiy, Lubomir Rintel, Krzysztof Halasa,
Koen Vandeputte, Linux ARM, Barry Song, Thomas Bogendoerfer,
Yoshinori Sato, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Jonas Jensen,
Tony Prisk, Hartley Sweeten, Mark Salter, Shawn Guo
Hi Arnd,
On 2021/1/15 20:04, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 12:09 PM Leizhen (ThunderTown)
> <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com> wrote:
>> On 2021/1/15 17:26, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 8:08 AM Wei Xu <xuwei5@hisilicon.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2021/1/14 0:14, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 11:55 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> wrote:
>>>>> * mmp -- added in 2009, DT support is active, but board files might go
>>>>> * cns3xxx -- added in 2010, last fixed in 2019, probably no users left
>>>>> * hisi (hip01/hip05) -- servers added in 2013, replaced with arm64 in 2016
>>>>
>>>> I think it is OK to drop the support of the hip01(arm32) and hip05(arm64).
>>>> Could you also help to drop the support of the hip04(arm32) which I think nobody use as well?
>>>
>>> Thank you for your reply! I actually meant to write hip04 instead of hip05,
>>> so I was only asking about the two 32-bit targets. I would expect that
>>> hip05 still has a few users, but wouldn't mind removing that as well if you
>>> are sure there are none.
>>>
>>> Since Zhen Lei is starting to upstream Kunpeng506 and Kunpeng509
>>> support, can you clarify how much reuse of IP blocks there is between
>>> hip04 and those? In particular, hip04 has custom code for (at least)
>>> platmcpm, clk, irqchip, ethernet, and hw_rng, probably more as those
>>> were only the ones I see on a quick grep.
>>>
>>> If we remove hip04, should we remove all these drivers right away,
>>> or keep some of them around?
>>
>> I think the drivers should be kept.
>
> Ok, will do.
>
>> Currently, at least hip04_eth.c and irq-hip04.c are used. These drivers
>> were originally written for Hip04, but the drivers used by other boards
>> maybe similar to them. Therefore, these drivers are extended without
>> adding new drivers.
>
> Right, so the other chips just use compatible="hisilicon,hip04-intc"
> etc. in their device trees? Is there a public copy of the dts files
> somewhere that I can use for cross-referencing? Sorry if I'm
> messing up the timeline for your upstreaming plans.
>
> It might actually be easier to leave hip01 and hip04 in the
> tree for the moment until you have upstreamed the other SoC
> support, and then we clean up by removing the unused bits
> afterwards. I'll leave it to you both to tell me which way is easier
> for you.
I have aligned with Leizhen and as you suggested it is better to keep them
for the moment.
Thanks!
Best Regards,
Wei
>
> Arnd
> .
>
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-01-21 12:53 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-01-15 20:37 [v2] Old platforms: bring out your dead John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
2021-01-15 21:17 ` Arnd Bergmann
2021-01-17 10:33 ` Michael Ellerman
2021-01-17 10:56 ` Arnd Bergmann
2021-01-17 13:26 ` John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
2021-01-21 11:58 ` Michael Ellerman
2021-01-21 12:51 ` Arnd Bergmann
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-01-08 22:55 Arnd Bergmann
2021-01-13 16:14 ` [v2] " Arnd Bergmann
2021-01-13 19:00 ` Krzysztof Hałasa
2021-01-13 19:00 ` Krzysztof Hałasa
2021-01-14 8:51 ` Arnd Bergmann
2021-01-14 8:51 ` Arnd Bergmann
2021-01-15 7:08 ` Wei Xu
2021-01-15 7:08 ` Wei Xu
2021-01-15 9:26 ` Arnd Bergmann
2021-01-15 9:26 ` Arnd Bergmann
2021-01-15 11:09 ` Leizhen (ThunderTown)
2021-01-15 11:09 ` Leizhen (ThunderTown)
2021-01-15 12:04 ` Arnd Bergmann
2021-01-15 12:04 ` Arnd Bergmann
2021-01-18 10:46 ` Wei Xu
2021-01-18 10:46 ` Wei Xu
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.