From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sylwester Nawrocki Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] ARM: EXYNOS: no more support non-DT for EXYNOS SoCs Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 15:46:21 +0200 Message-ID: <51656D2D.7060004@samsung.com> References: <51642dab.e844440a.0ad1.ffffc13f@mx.google.com> <310101ce35d7$00e7e000$02b7a000$%kim@samsung.com> <516541EB.8080404@samsung.com> <201304101459.07263.arnd@arndb.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailout3.w1.samsung.com ([210.118.77.13]:64847 "EHLO mailout3.w1.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752466Ab3DJNqY (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Apr 2013 09:46:24 -0400 Received: from eucpsbgm2.samsung.com (unknown [203.254.199.245]) by mailout3.w1.samsung.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-24.01(7.0.4.24.0) 64bit (built Nov 17 2011)) with ESMTP id <0ML1007OTKV7GNA0@mailout3.w1.samsung.com> for linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 14:46:22 +0100 (BST) In-reply-to: <201304101459.07263.arnd@arndb.de> Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Kukjin Kim , linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, 'Thomas Abraham' , 'Kyungmin Park' , 'Olof Johansson' On 04/10/2013 02:59 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wednesday 10 April 2013, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote: >> On 04/10/2013 12:34 PM, Kukjin Kim wrote: >>> Kukjin Kim wrote: >>>> >>>> From: Kukjin Kim >>>> >>>> As we discussed in mailing list, non-DT for EXYNOS SoCs will not be >>>> supported from v3.10. This patch removes regarding files for non-DT >>>> including board files. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Kukjin Kim >> >> It looks OK to me. > > Ok. I am currently rebuilding my exynos multiplatform series on top of the > branches merged yesterday, but keeping ATAGS support alive there. > > Should I rebase on top of this patch instead? Hmm, it turns out we are still actively using some boards based on Exynos4210 EVT0 SoCs. And since it seems unlikely the patches from Tomasz [1] adding basic DT support for those will get merged for 3.10, it would be a bit inconvenient to remove the ATAGS support now, leaving Exynos4210 Rev. 0 not supported at all. Not sure what's others opinion on that, and what would be an advantage of removing non-dt support for Exynos now, rather than in 3.11, vs. any possible inconvenience and regressions this could cause. [1] http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg235745.html Thanks, Sylwester From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: s.nawrocki@samsung.com (Sylwester Nawrocki) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 15:46:21 +0200 Subject: [PATCH RESEND] ARM: EXYNOS: no more support non-DT for EXYNOS SoCs In-Reply-To: <201304101459.07263.arnd@arndb.de> References: <51642dab.e844440a.0ad1.ffffc13f@mx.google.com> <310101ce35d7$00e7e000$02b7a000$%kim@samsung.com> <516541EB.8080404@samsung.com> <201304101459.07263.arnd@arndb.de> Message-ID: <51656D2D.7060004@samsung.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 04/10/2013 02:59 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wednesday 10 April 2013, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote: >> On 04/10/2013 12:34 PM, Kukjin Kim wrote: >>> Kukjin Kim wrote: >>>> >>>> From: Kukjin Kim >>>> >>>> As we discussed in mailing list, non-DT for EXYNOS SoCs will not be >>>> supported from v3.10. This patch removes regarding files for non-DT >>>> including board files. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Kukjin Kim >> >> It looks OK to me. > > Ok. I am currently rebuilding my exynos multiplatform series on top of the > branches merged yesterday, but keeping ATAGS support alive there. > > Should I rebase on top of this patch instead? Hmm, it turns out we are still actively using some boards based on Exynos4210 EVT0 SoCs. And since it seems unlikely the patches from Tomasz [1] adding basic DT support for those will get merged for 3.10, it would be a bit inconvenient to remove the ATAGS support now, leaving Exynos4210 Rev. 0 not supported at all. Not sure what's others opinion on that, and what would be an advantage of removing non-dt support for Exynos now, rather than in 3.11, vs. any possible inconvenience and regressions this could cause. [1] http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg235745.html Thanks, Sylwester