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=-10.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable 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 18D4FC4338F for ; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 12:12:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3D7460F35 for ; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 12:12:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235698AbhHCMM7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Aug 2021 08:12:59 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:52834 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233906AbhHCMM6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Aug 2021 08:12:58 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-x12f.google.com (mail-lf1-x12f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12f]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F1D3C061757 for ; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 05:12:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-x12f.google.com with SMTP id p38so24412606lfa.0 for ; Tue, 03 Aug 2021 05:12:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=CjwFLstJrPnRmXg/rZRQYNcQZixdp2USEJZj3tF3f38=; b=QZvsRYa5PI0EjkNxpFJt0PjnkZl/KzLMkb06EW7T3tkTDAe4SGOPJhjWDkxfPWHvtP bXdVGwpVKHTCyVg74Io3kBqhbco3yndRvKndVVFP1tHO789dMj3mi3/UKGHCbUs+ZydN oqwUFqGcDgydpFFlJRoUTPa8ExjIjwY2nex7pkICvVHbSkG56SCi7BVTrYd1c5GPKxnu WYIuFov9/lUOjKg/fB7OpjVWR72yCX91lvbLkibrUvmaZovNuqrdFJE9FOkNSzdV86PG ffLRdFMBmEjJrK1qId5SfGLKqHKBDClc9krcDn3h9GL2lJhJ9kmrWkaIFG/sn/8eVOt3 Qofg== 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=CjwFLstJrPnRmXg/rZRQYNcQZixdp2USEJZj3tF3f38=; b=sQL5L+oJhVUEm3BpK/juIHjDsiEwgZX3cOJZ2meYoh941L9Q/3hGZJD28ls3iXaPbM pldfABWf3Sf/LCQlrfcQ6SXcchOqO+3NXu56FCygvXB5280RPq0cn29xejbQWTf9WzBJ lNN1UaKgyUEhAKRvPpGnST3O0H+IGdWmqO+si0rQi86gm3uPTzoqgCm8XINVzyLRaxYe /luG/HdJoCONNA4GkgWS2JC2/6GnapfBFdIyE3fkhPqjbCB2jfrvsrDqWtmHPM6wbJjd s8Lnphp9RGHM6h+OO9MUMJ5UE49Krfr1WB+n43UsGPFKPB3su3HxIl6jCJit+0e+2R9v 8qvw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533Vf6kPc2ju+5YTsi+Emw0Xq7oA927aJZc73AUel7jgeuYNYOh4 Od4oBFJqkzdnpFcKcez1HLb5EiG5auqPgdFoBpncOg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz782mMUx2DQxPgWR7w25+Ro1pQSWnX/5zTyOK3W2u5RXz/AhlGd1Pib3weOa5vmkxj00IAN8QgYUu3dBYZqNw= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:132a:: with SMTP id x42mr15849594lfu.291.1627992764702; Tue, 03 Aug 2021 05:12:44 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210802141245.1146772-1-arnd@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: From: Linus Walleij Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2021 14:12:33 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: ep93xx: remove MaverickCrunch support To: Martin Guy List-Id: Cc: Arnd Bergmann , Russell King , Hartley Sweeten , Alexander Sverdlin , SoC Team , Nikita Shubin , Arnd Bergmann , Oleg Nesterov , Hubert Feurstein , Lukasz Majewski , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Nathan Chancellor , Nick Desaulniers , Linux ARM , linux-kernel , clang-built-linux Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20210803121233.sJTGZgOvWiqdqOHH6KkyOw6jzf7fhEmXtXYUfN2RJ1U@z> On Mon, Aug 2, 2021 at 5:45 PM Martin Guy wrote: > > was removed from gcc in its 4.8 release in 2012. > > I was sad about that, as I had managed to get it working correctly in > 4.2 4.3 and 4.4. > Unfortunately the GCC ARM maintainer at the time was paid by ARM, and > they had no interest in it, as I gather the ARM-Cirrus partnership > ended up disappointingly. Political issues aside, have you considered contributing support to LLVM instead? It currently doesn't even support ARMv4 AFAIK but reportedly has an easier to use and maintain back-end. (I do not know if this is true, I just browsed this: https://llvm.org/docs/WritingAnLLVMBackend.html ) Current ARM Targets are here: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/tree/main/llvm/lib/Target/ARM And they have a very clear and straight-forward developer policy: https://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html If ARMv4 support could be added to LLVM, that would solve a lot of my headaches for ARM32, where we have things like SA110 being actively maintained. Yours, Linus Walleij