From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 22:15:54 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 00/19] ARM: SAMSUNG: S5PV210 platform clean-up In-Reply-To: <1404496099-26708-1-git-send-email-t.figa@samsung.com> References: <1404496099-26708-1-git-send-email-t.figa@samsung.com> Message-ID: <12714831.uRzVr7yNEz@wuerfel> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Friday 04 July 2014 19:48:00 Tomasz Figa wrote: > This huge series is a (hopefully final) attempt to convert Samsung S5PV210 > into a DT-only and multiplatform-aware platform. It consists of several > steps to gradually replace legacy code with one meeting current standards > and then finally remove unused remnants. > > Patches 1-6 migrate the platform to fully use the Common Clock Framework > and get rid of legacy private clock code, of which s5pv210 was the last > user. Then patch 7 adds generic PHY driver for USB PHY on S5PV210 to allow > USB to be supported when using DT. Further three patches (8-10) add DT > support for mach-s5pv210 and necessary DT sources for currently supported > boards. Patch 11 removes board files and code directly related to them, > effectively making s5pv210 a DT-only platform. In next step, patches 12-15 > prepare remaining code for multiplatform enablement, which is finally done > in patch 16. Patches 17-19 are a final clean-up, which remove a lot of > unused code left after making the last S5P platform DT-only. > > Build tested patch by patch on following configs: > - s3c2410_defconfig (with DT support enabled), > - s3c6400_defconfig (with DT support enabled), > - s5pv210_defconfig (with DT support enabled after patches adding it), > - exynos_defconfig, > - exynos_defconfig with S5PV210 enabled in multiplatform configuration. > > Boot tested on s5pv210-goni board. > > Note that support for smdkc110, smdkv210 and torbreck boards is provided > by moving data from existing board files to new device tree sources. No > testing was performed due to mentioned board not being available anymore. > However I believe we agreed on this approach, because apparently there > are no active users of them. See the RFC from August 2013 asking for > removal of the whole platform [1]. > > [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-samsung-soc%40vger.kernel.org/msg21882.html > > Great work, everything Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann I hope we can get this into linux-next soon so we can do some more cleanups on top. Arnd