From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com (Alexandre Belloni) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 18:12:43 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 00/11] ARM: at91: remove !DT support for at91rm9200 In-Reply-To: <3550407.q87bWB4Jdt@wuerfel> References: <3550407.q87bWB4Jdt@wuerfel> Message-ID: <20141127171243.GL4508@piout.net> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 27/11/2014 at 17:49:50 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote : > On Thursday 27 November 2014 17:06:28 Nicolas Ferre wrote: > > This is the last series of patches that removes the non-Device-Tree board > > support for older Atmel SoCs. > > Again, for the record, it was announced here > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/9/10/293 ([ANNOUNCE] ARM: at91: removal of board > > files) two months ago. > > Several files beyond at91rm9200 are touched this time as I tried to remove the > > biggest parts that were related to !DT SoC initializations. More cleanup is > > certainly needed to remove dead code. > > > > The diffstat is also pretty big as a lot of at91rm9200 boards were remaining. > > > > Awesome stuff! > > Two questions: > > - is anything holding this up from getting merged in 3.19? > If you think this is not too late in the cycle, I would say go ahead ;) > - Are there any remaining issues that keep us from using multiplatform? > I know you all have been working on those a lot, but I haven't > checked what is still missing. > As discussed some weeks ago, I prepared patches to switch sama5d[3-4] to multiplatform. We are still missing the SMC and matrix drivers to switch sam9 and rm9200. The currently affected drivers are: - drivers/ata/pata_at91.c (SMC) - drivers/pcmcia/at91_cf.c (SMC) - drivers/usb/gadget/udc/at91_udc.c (Matrix, this is the only one for sam9) - sound/atmel/ac97c.c (that one is still not converted to DT anyway...) - drivers/watchdog/at91rm9200_wdt.c (WIP, will be converted properly to an MFD) I'll resume working on that in December. Do you want me to submit the sama5d[3-4] switch for 3.19? I'll have to rebase on that series. The main remaining issue is that I couldn't work out a way not breaking the defconfigs, even after talking with the Kconfig maintainer so doing first sama5 then sam9/rm9200 will break the defconfigs for sam9/rm9200 twice. -- Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com