From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
James Hogan <jhogan@kernel.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
"moderated list:PANASONIC MN10300..."
<linux-am33-list@redhat.com>,
Hirokazu Takata <takata@linux-m32r.org>,
Lennox Wu <lennox.wu@gmail.com>, Aaron Wu <Aaron.Wu@analog.com>,
Bryan Wu <cooloney@gmail.com>,
Chris Metcalf <chris.d.metcalf@gmail.com>,
Jesper Nilsson <jesper.nilsson@axis.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] arch: remove obsolete architecture ports
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 10:38:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a3Rj7utFTrNrNiv3948whE9Tsta9mmLPdX5HxBhif-_9w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180404080142.GC9342@amd>
On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 10:01 AM, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote:
> On Tue 2018-04-03 11:18:15, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> In reality, a resurrection may not be implemented as a pure revert, but as
>> the addition of a new architecture, implemented using modern features (DT,
>> CCF, ...).
>
> By insisting on new features instead of pure revert + incremental
> updates, you pretty much make sure resurection will not be possible
> :-(.
It wasn't that anybody demanded it to be that way, but rather that the
maintainer chose to do it like that, as you can see from the first version
that got posted: https://marc.info/?l=linux-arch&m=142181640803103
This is the only reference point we have, since no other architecture
ever got removed and then put back.
Also, now that the other architectures are gone, a lot of changes can
be done more easily that will be incompatible with a pure revert, so
the more time passes, the harder it will get to do that.
Some of the architectures (e.g. tile or cris) have been kept up to
date, but others had already bitrotted to the point where they were
unlikely to work on any real hardware for many relases, but a revert
could still be used as a starting point in theory.
Arnd
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-04-04 8:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-04-02 7:17 [GIT PULL] arch: remove obsolete architecture ports Arnd Bergmann
2018-04-02 18:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-04-02 19:54 ` Arnd Bergmann
2018-04-03 9:18 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-04-04 8:01 ` Pavel Machek
2018-04-04 8:38 ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2018-04-04 13:28 ` James Hogan
2018-04-03 2:57 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2018-04-03 4:08 ` Linus Torvalds
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAK8P3a3Rj7utFTrNrNiv3948whE9Tsta9mmLPdX5HxBhif-_9w@mail.gmail.com \
--to=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=Aaron.Wu@analog.com \
--cc=chris.d.metcalf@gmail.com \
--cc=cooloney@gmail.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=jesper.nilsson@axis.com \
--cc=jhogan@kernel.org \
--cc=lennox.wu@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-am33-list@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=takata@linux-m32r.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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.