On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 10:06 AM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2023, at 09:37, Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
> > Commit 150ccb6f9a89 ("ARM: pxa: remove pxa93x support") removes configs
> > CPU_PXA930 and CPU_PXA935 and uses of cpu_is_pxa93x() and cpu_is_pxa935().
> >
> > Remove some further dead code in ./include/linux/soc/pxa/cpu.h on top of
> > that commit above.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> I had this in an earlier version and ended up leaving this bit in
> when I reworked the series to not drop support for PXA310 and PXA320.
>
> You are probably right that we should not reference the removed
> Kconfig symbols, but I see that this causes a regression
> unless I also bring back the change to
>
> drivers/mmc/host/pxamci.c: || cpu_is_pxa935())
>
Thanks for the insights of your previous attempt. In my janitorial
work, I am just triggered by references to removed configs and hardly
have the resources to test all the various arm pxa configs. Let us
keep it as is for now, and see once your clean-up has settled in
mainline, if we find a good suitable further cleanup patch on these
code parts here then.
Lukas
