All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@linaro.org>
To: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
Cc: Daniel Walker <dwalker@fifo99.com>,
	David Brown <davidb@codeaurora.org>,
	Bryan Huntsman <bryanh@codeaurora.org>,
	Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] ARM: msm: Remove 7x00 support
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 16:08:27 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ob66nyqc.fsf@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOesGMhg8HN4Su9FXSeoAgmH6NVKXW+wmnreUvWH+1G6GWkkaA@mail.gmail.com> (Olof Johansson's message of "Tue, 29 Oct 2013 08:37:28 -0700")

Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> writes:

> I would be very happy to take more code for the older Qualcomm chipset
> to enable full functionality for them, but it's been my impression
> that far from all that is needed to make it a useful platform is in
> the upstream kernel, and there's been no signs of more of it showing
> up at least in the last two years.
>
> So we have a bit of a stalemate here -- the current Qualcomm team
> wants to avoid having to deal too much with the legacy platforms --
> they are technically quite different from the current platforms and
> the divergence makes it hard to deal with supporting it all in a
> modern way without risking regressions. I tend to agree with them.

As do I.

> Just like omap split between omap1 and omap2plus, I think it's a time
> to create a mach-qcom instead, and move the modern (v7, most likely)
> platforms there -- enable them with device tree, modern framework
> infrastructure, etc. That way you can keep older platforms in mach-msm
> without risk of regressions, and they have a clean base to start on
> with their later platforms.

I think this split approach is a good compromise.

If the maintainers of the current older platforms wish to bring them up
to modern frameworks, we can consider combining again.  If not, they the
older platforms will take the same path as the rest of the older
platforms that slowly fade away.

Kevin

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: khilman@linaro.org (Kevin Hilman)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/4] ARM: msm: Remove 7x00 support
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 16:08:27 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ob66nyqc.fsf@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOesGMhg8HN4Su9FXSeoAgmH6NVKXW+wmnreUvWH+1G6GWkkaA@mail.gmail.com> (Olof Johansson's message of "Tue, 29 Oct 2013 08:37:28 -0700")

Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> writes:

> I would be very happy to take more code for the older Qualcomm chipset
> to enable full functionality for them, but it's been my impression
> that far from all that is needed to make it a useful platform is in
> the upstream kernel, and there's been no signs of more of it showing
> up at least in the last two years.
>
> So we have a bit of a stalemate here -- the current Qualcomm team
> wants to avoid having to deal too much with the legacy platforms --
> they are technically quite different from the current platforms and
> the divergence makes it hard to deal with supporting it all in a
> modern way without risking regressions. I tend to agree with them.

As do I.

> Just like omap split between omap1 and omap2plus, I think it's a time
> to create a mach-qcom instead, and move the modern (v7, most likely)
> platforms there -- enable them with device tree, modern framework
> infrastructure, etc. That way you can keep older platforms in mach-msm
> without risk of regressions, and they have a clean base to start on
> with their later platforms.

I think this split approach is a good compromise.

If the maintainers of the current older platforms wish to bring them up
to modern frameworks, we can consider combining again.  If not, they the
older platforms will take the same path as the rest of the older
platforms that slowly fade away.

Kevin

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@linaro.org>
To: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
Cc: Daniel Walker <dwalker@fifo99.com>,
	David Brown <davidb@codeaurora.org>,
	Bryan Huntsman <bryanh@codeaurora.org>,
	Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	"linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
	"linux-arm-kernel\@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] ARM: msm: Remove 7x00 support
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 16:08:27 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ob66nyqc.fsf@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOesGMhg8HN4Su9FXSeoAgmH6NVKXW+wmnreUvWH+1G6GWkkaA@mail.gmail.com> (Olof Johansson's message of "Tue, 29 Oct 2013 08:37:28 -0700")

Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> writes:

> I would be very happy to take more code for the older Qualcomm chipset
> to enable full functionality for them, but it's been my impression
> that far from all that is needed to make it a useful platform is in
> the upstream kernel, and there's been no signs of more of it showing
> up at least in the last two years.
>
> So we have a bit of a stalemate here -- the current Qualcomm team
> wants to avoid having to deal too much with the legacy platforms --
> they are technically quite different from the current platforms and
> the divergence makes it hard to deal with supporting it all in a
> modern way without risking regressions. I tend to agree with them.

As do I.

> Just like omap split between omap1 and omap2plus, I think it's a time
> to create a mach-qcom instead, and move the modern (v7, most likely)
> platforms there -- enable them with device tree, modern framework
> infrastructure, etc. That way you can keep older platforms in mach-msm
> without risk of regressions, and they have a clean base to start on
> with their later platforms.

I think this split approach is a good compromise.

If the maintainers of the current older platforms wish to bring them up
to modern frameworks, we can consider combining again.  If not, they the
older platforms will take the same path as the rest of the older
platforms that slowly fade away.

Kevin

  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-10-30 23:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 66+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-10-28 20:43 [PATCH 0/4] Remove older ARM msm SoC support David Brown
2013-10-28 20:43 ` David Brown
2013-10-28 20:43 ` [PATCH 1/4] ARM: msm: Remove unused board files David Brown
2013-10-28 20:43   ` David Brown
2013-10-28 20:43 ` [PATCH 2/4] ARM: msm: Remove 7x00 support David Brown
2013-10-28 20:43   ` David Brown
2013-10-29 13:21   ` Daniel Walker
2013-10-29 13:21     ` Daniel Walker
2013-10-29 15:37     ` Olof Johansson
2013-10-29 15:37       ` Olof Johansson
2013-10-29 17:08       ` Daniel Walker
2013-10-29 17:08         ` Daniel Walker
2013-10-29 17:39         ` Olof Johansson
2013-10-29 17:39           ` Olof Johansson
2013-10-29 18:40           ` Tony Lindgren
2013-10-29 18:40             ` Tony Lindgren
2013-10-29 19:03           ` Daniel Walker
2013-10-29 19:03             ` Daniel Walker
2013-10-30 23:08       ` Kevin Hilman [this message]
2013-10-30 23:08         ` Kevin Hilman
2013-10-30 23:08         ` Kevin Hilman
2013-10-30 23:25         ` Daniel Walker
2013-10-30 23:25           ` Daniel Walker
2013-10-31  0:36           ` Olof Johansson
2013-10-31  0:36             ` Olof Johansson
2013-10-31  0:36             ` Olof Johansson
2013-10-31  2:45             ` Daniel Walker
2013-10-31  2:45               ` Daniel Walker
2013-10-31  5:19               ` Olof Johansson
2013-10-31  5:19                 ` Olof Johansson
2013-10-31 12:07                 ` Daniel Walker
2013-10-31 12:07                   ` Daniel Walker
2013-10-31 15:53                   ` Olof Johansson
2013-10-31 15:53                     ` Olof Johansson
2013-10-31 16:33                     ` Daniel Walker
2013-10-31 16:33                       ` Daniel Walker
2013-10-31 17:12           ` Kevin Hilman
2013-10-31 17:12             ` Kevin Hilman
2013-10-31 17:12             ` Kevin Hilman
2013-10-31 17:35             ` Daniel Walker
2013-10-31 17:35               ` Daniel Walker
2013-10-31 17:35               ` Daniel Walker
2013-10-31 18:51               ` Kevin Hilman
2013-10-31 18:51                 ` Kevin Hilman
2013-10-31 18:51                 ` Kevin Hilman
2013-10-31 19:39                 ` Daniel Walker
2013-10-31 19:39                   ` Daniel Walker
2013-10-31 19:23               ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-10-31 19:23                 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-10-31 19:43                 ` Daniel Walker
2013-10-31 19:43                   ` Daniel Walker
2013-10-28 20:43 ` [PATCH 3/4] ARM: msm: Remove 7x30 support David Brown
2013-10-28 20:43   ` David Brown
2013-10-29 21:15   ` [PATCH 3/4] ARM: msm: Remove 7x30 supporty Daniel Walker
2013-10-29 21:15     ` Daniel Walker
2013-10-30 13:23     ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-10-30 13:23       ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-10-30 13:23       ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-10-28 20:43 ` [PATCH 4/4] ARM: msm: Remove 8x50 support David Brown
2013-10-28 20:43   ` David Brown
2013-10-29 21:19   ` Daniel Walker
2013-10-29 21:19     ` Daniel Walker
2013-10-30 13:30     ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-10-30 13:30       ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-10-30 15:50       ` Daniel Walker
2013-10-30 15:50         ` Daniel Walker

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87ob66nyqc.fsf@linaro.org \
    --to=khilman@linaro.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=bryanh@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=davidb@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=dwalker@fifo99.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=olof@lixom.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.