From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 512B0C77B61 for ; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 02:14:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4PyKlY54mcz3fRj for ; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 12:14:49 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ellerman.id.au header.i=@ellerman.id.au header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=201909 header.b=hQSZJO3U; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from gandalf.ozlabs.org (gandalf.ozlabs.org [150.107.74.76]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4PyKkf07dRz3bdV for ; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 12:14:02 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ellerman.id.au header.i=@ellerman.id.au header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=201909 header.b=hQSZJO3U; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from authenticated.ozlabs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4PyKkc638pz4xDr; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 12:14:00 +1000 (AEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ellerman.id.au; s=201909; t=1681438441; bh=K/a4KAZsSt3zs9UkrVWa7AJf0yfJnV4tv3ScoCGpOMk=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=hQSZJO3UBZ/quReL6OrU8CGObjBh3cehwDtPtL+u4f/wOct63fotO4UH6YzbCIvwO a9Efwpz24HqyhOOaWPYf+62+C4NDwU/YTLW868b9Bgp0oyXSKj19q/yTyPj64YXEyi xGnA3I5m7HV8plXa4aqW4p5nG5OoWkyQ3bFBx+zTNMBm3Y2IipQrUmyJADDz7hNzbE 7aBNHRajwFrBxlA4qtkFcch3Q80bwQSa/hkcim1uPswQhWbpMt7+dxTbGYdwtTPQz2 zbIhUvCgKugBqtvxaqx6G29GObTx7b2pav0nRb7OkQPOK1EDFEX2u8qJIJL4dt02Jb qcBFCu0skqhxA== From: Michael Ellerman To: Li Yang , Paul Gortmaker Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Remove some e500/MPC85xx evaluation platforms In-Reply-To: References: <20230221194637.28436-1-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2023 12:13:55 +1000 Message-ID: <87o7nr9png.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Scott Wood , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Claudiu Manoil , Paul Mackerras , Pali =?utf-8?Q?Roh=C3=A1r?= Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" Li Yang writes: > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 1:52=E2=80=AFPM Paul Gortmaker > wrote: >> >> [This RFC is proposed for v6.4 and hence is based off linux-next.] >> >> In a similar theme to the e300/MPC83xx evaluation platform removal[1], >> this targets removal of some 13 --> 21 year old e500/MPC85xx evaluation >> boards that were produced in limited numbers and primarily made available >> to hardware/software developers to shape their own boards and BSPs. > > These e500 platforms are similar to the e300 platforms that they are > still being shipped, the targeting market probably caused it to have a > longer life cycle. > ... > > The difference here from the e300 platforms is that MPC8540ADS, > MPC8560ADS, MPC8548CDS, MPC8568-MDS are the only reference platforms > supplied by us for these SoCs. We don't have a separation of > evaluation platforms vs product-like platforms like we did later. > That probably means even if they don't look like "hobbyist" friendly > they are more likely to be still in use. OK. But what is the chance anyone is booting upstream kernels on them? I assume no one at NXP is testing upstream on those boards? cheers