On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 9:54 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 8:57 PM, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Regarding a possible revert, that would indeed involve reverting
> multiple patches for most architectures, plus parts of at least these
> three:
>
> Documentation: arch-support: remove obsolete architectures
> treewide: simplify Kconfig dependencies for removed archs
> ktest: remove obsolete architectures
>
> For those, I went the other way, and removed all architectures at
> once to simplify my work and to avoid touching the same files up
> to eight times with interdependent patches (which couldn't
> be reverted without conflicts either).
>
> There are a couple of driver removal patches that got picked up
> into subsystem trees instead of this tree, so a full revert would also
> involve finding other drivers, but if you prefer to have the patches
> completely split up by arch, I could rework the series that way.
In reality, a resurrection may not be implemented as a pure revert, but as
the addition of a new architecture, implemented using modern features (DT,
CCF, ...).
Cfr. the resurrected arch/h8300, which doesn't have much in common with
the removed one:
$ git diff --stat v3.12..v4.2 -- arch/h8300
[...]
197 files changed, 3155 insertions(+), 7849 deletions(-)
(for a total of ca. 6200 lines)
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
