On Wed, May 3, 2023, at 03:17, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 5:52 PM Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 02/05/2023 22:40, Rob Herring wrote:
>> > 'berlin' : 'berlin',
>> > 'pxa2' : 'pxa',
>> > 'pxa3' : 'pxa',
>> > 'pxa' : 'marvell',
>>
>> I'd question if it makes sense to split the pxa line. Yes, it was sold
>> by Intel to Marvell, but IIRC the devices still had some inheritance.
>> So, if we have the 'pxa' subdir, I'd move Marvell PXAs to that dir too.
>
> I think I probably split it because it was different maintainers.
> Though it doesn't look like pxa168 or pxa910 have any maintainer. They
> are a mixture of pxa and mmp I think.
I think the original split here is probably the best we can do,
but there is no good way to do it because of the confusing naming
and the problem that there is no clear line between pxa and mmp.
As far as I can tell, the release timeline was:
Intel pxa2xx (mach-pxa, xscale, still exists)
Intel pxa3xx (mach-pxa, xscale, still exists)
Intel pxa90x (never merged)
Marvell pxa93x (mach-pxa, xscale, removed in Linux-6.3, no DT)
Marvell pxa92x (never merged)
Marvell pxa91x (mach-mmp, pj1, still exists)
Marvell pxa168 (mach-mmp, pj1, still exists)
Marvell pxa95x (mach-pxa, pj4, long gone)
Marvell pxa688 (mach-mmp, pj4, known as mmp2)
So with pxa93x out of the picture, we can simplify it as using
'pxa' as the name for all the above chips with an Intel XScale
core, and 'marvell' for all the other ones that have a Marvell
core and exist in mach-mmp.
Arnd
