On 31. 03. 20 11:49, Christophe Leroy wrote: > > > Le 31/03/2020 à 09:19, Christophe Leroy a écrit : >> >> >> Le 31/03/2020 à 08:59, Michal Simek a écrit : >>> On 31. 03. 20 8:56, Christophe Leroy wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Le 31/03/2020 à 07:30, Michael Ellerman a écrit : >>>>> Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@xxxxxx> writes: >>>>>> 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 ? >>>>> >>>>> I have no attachment to 40x, and I'd certainly be happy to have less >>>>> code in the tree, we struggle to keep even the modern platforms well >>>>> maintained. >>>>> >>>>> At the same time I don't want to render anyone's hardware obsolete >>>>> unnecessarily. But if there's really no one using 40x then we should >>>>> remove it, it could well be broken already. >>>>> >>>>> So I guess post a series to do the removal and we'll see if anyone >>>>> speaks up. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Ok, series sent out, see >>>> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linuxppc-dev/list/?series=167757 >>> >>> ok. I see you have done it completely independently of my patchset. >>> Would be better if you can base it on the top of my 2 patches because >>> they are in conflict now and I need to also remove virtex 44x platform >>> also with alsa driver. >>> >> >> I can't see your first patch, only the second one shows up in the >> series, see >> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linuxppc-dev/list/?series=167757 >> > > > Ok, I found your first patch on another patchwork, it doesn't touch any > file in arch/powerpc/ There was just driver dependency on symbol which is removed by 2/2. Let's see what you get from kbuild if any symbol is removed but still used in drivers folder. > > I sent a v2 series with your powerpc patch as patch 2/11 > > See https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linuxppc-dev/list/?series=167766 Thanks, Michal
