From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com (Alexandre Belloni) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2017 17:21:33 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v2 1/3] mtd: nand: Cleanup/rework the atmel_nand driver In-Reply-To: References: <20170220213803.7ba5591e@bbrezillon> <20170220215009.0ecbf5a1@bbrezillon> <20170221090610.6d531b94@bbrezillon> <20170221112641.6276c001@bbrezillon> <20170221112720.ynehsryprhrhzjla@piout.net> Message-ID: <20170221162133.jch6yzpotj4s7zob@piout.net> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 21/02/2017 at 18:09:09 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Alexandre Belloni > wrote: > > (adding Hans-Christian) > > > > On 21/02/2017 at 13:02:21 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > >> Abusing platform data with pointers is also not welcome. > >> > >> > (in this case, avr32). > >> > >> It's dead de facto. > >> > >> When last time did you compile kernel for it? What was the version of kernel? > >> Did it get successfully? > >> > > > > v4.10-rc3 was building successfully but had some issues in the network > > code. > > Newer kernel doesn't link... > > >> When are we going to remove avr32 support from kernel completely? > > > Ask that to the avr32 maintainers. It still builds and is still booted > > by some people. And that actually seems to be you as you reported a bug > > we introduced in 4.3. I don't think we had any other report after that. > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9505727/ > > After that I gave up on it. Next time I will escalate directly to > Linus. It's a complete necrophilia. I spent already enough time to > look at that code. It brings now more burden than supports someone > somewhere. > As said, it builds fine without networking. Maybe the first step is to ask the avr32 maintainers. If you already did so, please feel free to send a patch to remove the whole architecture. The benefits for atmel will be: proper big endian support, removal of platform data from all the drivers, better clocksource handling. > > It can be frustrating at times to handle that platform but if it is > > working for someone, I don't see why we would remove it. > > How it's working if it's not linked? > Come on, v4.10 has just been release and v4.9 was building just fine. Do you really expect everybody to closely follow linux-next or update overnight? -- Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com