Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] drivers: misc: ti-st: begin to deorbit

From: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: marcel@holtmann.org, johan.hedberg@gmail.com,
	luiz.dentz@gmail.com, johan@kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de,
	linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	tomi.valkeinen@ideasonboard.com,
	"Tony Lindgren" <tony@atomide.com>,
	"Péter Ujfalusi" <peter.ujfalusi@gmail.com>,
	robh@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] drivers: misc: ti-st: begin to deorbit
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2023 22:50:32 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231210225032.38d8c36f@aktux> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2023112729-qualify-relearn-6a72@gregkh>

Hi Greg,

On Mon, 27 Nov 2023 08:25:46 +0000
Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 26, 2023 at 08:18:40PM +0100, Andreas Kemnade wrote:
> > The TI-ST driver seems not to be used anymore. For bluetooth needs
> > there is hci_ll.c which has device tree support and can work without
> > this one. Also firmware download support is there, so it is also not needed
> > here. GPS can also reuse parts of the framework in hci_ll
> > 
> > Contrary from this driver, device tree support has been removed.
> > 
> > So start deorbiting it by marking it as broken.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info>
> > ---
> >  drivers/misc/ti-st/Kconfig | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/misc/ti-st/Kconfig b/drivers/misc/ti-st/Kconfig
> > index 1503a6496f632..6bf9cc845745c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/misc/ti-st/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/misc/ti-st/Kconfig
> > @@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ menu "Texas Instruments shared transport line discipline"
> >  config TI_ST
> >  	tristate "Shared transport core driver"
> >  	depends on NET && TTY
> > -	depends on GPIOLIB || COMPILE_TEST
> > +	depends on GPIOLIB || COMPILE_TEST || BROKEN  
> 
> Why not just delete it?  Why have it stick around any longer?
> 
Well, I just thought that marking something as broken and then deleting
it if no one complains would be the standard procedure. So we can
delete it now since there are obviously no users (no board files, no
device tree support)?

The logical connection between the other patches of this series is given
only by the fact that patches 1+2 are for me the proof that we do not
need that ti-st driver. 
I think since there are no in-tree users, having that proof in lkml is
enough, so we can probably remove the driver now?

I will send a separate remove patch including going with a brush through
include/linux/ti_wilink_st.h

Regards,
Andreas