On Sun, Jul 3, 2022 at 1:24 PM Alexander Sverdlin
<alexander.sverdlin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hello Nikita, Lukasz, Hartley,
> On Thu, 2022-06-30 at 09:42 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > > ep93xx
> > > >
> > > > These are still used, and the platform includes the only remaining two
> > > > board files that were added after linux-3.0. DT support is probably
> > > > doable now that common-clk works. Need information about which boards
> > > > are important.
> > >
> > > I'm still maintaining/able to test CONFIG_MACH_EDB93XX (edb93xx.c).
> >
> > Noted, thanks! We'll leave them in for 2023 then.
> >
> > Any thoughts on long-term uses for the platform? Do you know of users
> > of any products other than the reference boards that would justify doing
> > a DT conversion, or do we just delete the platform another time?
>
> what are your projections for EP93xx support?
>
> I'm personally a bit pessimistic about DT conversion because existing partition
> tables were already challenged by the kernel growth. It has at least grown
> +60% with the same config since 2006. This makes me think that 2023 EOL for this
> SoC might be feasible.
I don't think converting the platform to DT will make the space
problem noticeably
worse, as the DT infrastructure is already enabled unconditionally since the
multiplatform enablement. There are probably a few more lines that need to be
added to parse DT properties in a couple of drivers, but removing the
board files
will save a bit as well.
There is little hope of stopping the general accumulation of code bloat through,
so any boards that are hitting a size limit are probably at the end of
their lives
regardless.
Arnd
