Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Fri, 2020-04-03 at 15:59 +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote: >> Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> > On Tue, 2020-03-31 at 16:30 +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote: >> > > 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. >> > >> > We shouldn't remove 40x completely. Just remove the Xilinx 405 >> > stuff. >> >> Congratulations on becoming the 40x maintainer! > > Didn't I give you my last 40x system ? :-) Probably, but my desk is nearly as messy as yours so it's probably buried under some even more obscure hardware :P > IBM still put 40x cores inside POWER chips no ? Oh yeah that's true. I guess most folks don't know that, or that they run RHEL on them. cheers
