Le 27/03/2020 à 15:14, Andy Shevchenko a écrit :
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 02:22:55PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 2:15 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 03:10:26PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 01:54:33PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 1:12 PM Michal Simek <michal.simek@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
...
It does raise a follow-up question about ppc40x though: is it time to
retire all of it?
Who knows?
I have in possession nice WD My Book Live, based on this architecture, and I
won't it gone from modern kernel support. OTOH I understand that amount of real
users not too big.
+Cc: Christian Lamparter, whom I owe for that WD box.
According to https://openwrt.org/toh/wd/mybooklive, that one is based on
APM82181/ppc464, so it is about several generations newer than what I
asked about (ppc40x).
Ah, and I have Amiga board, but that one is being used only for testing, so,
I don't care much.
I think there are a couple of ppc440 based Amiga boards, but again, not 405
to my knowledge.
Ah, you are right. No objections from ppc40x removal!
Removing 40x would help cleaning things a bit. For instance 40x is the
last platform still having PTE_ATOMIC_UPDATES. So if we can remove 40x
we can get rid of PTE_ATOMIC_UPDATES completely.
If no one objects, I can prepare a series to drop support for 40x
completely.
Michael, any thought ?
Christophe
