[PATCH 0/7] ARM: Removing ARCH_S5PC100

[PATCH 0/7] ARM: Removing ARCH_S5PC100

[Kukjin Kim]

This patch remvoes mach-s5pc100 directory for ARCH_S5PC100 in arch/arm.

If any problems, please let me know immediately.

[PATCH 1/7] ARM: S5PC100: Removing ARCH_S5PC100
[PATCH 2/7] ASoC: Remove to support sound for S5PC100
[PATCH 3/7] [media] s5p-fimc: Remove to support fimc for S5PC100
[PATCH 4/7] mtd: OneNAND: Remove to support onenand for S5PC100
[PATCH 5/7] tty: Remove to support serial for S5PC100
[PATCH 6/7] video: s3c-fb: Remove to support fb for S5PC100
[PATCH 7/7] libata: Remove to support pata for S5PC100

[PATCH 2/7] ASoC: Remove to support sound for S5PC100

[Kukjin Kim]

According to removing ARCH_S5PC100, we don't need to support
sound for S5PC100.

Cc: Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@gmail.com>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Signed-off-by: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>
---
 sound/soc/samsung/Kconfig |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/sound/soc/samsung/Kconfig b/sound/soc/samsung/Kconfig
index a3fdfb6..9ed5d11 100644
--- a/sound/soc/samsung/Kconfig
+++ b/sound/soc/samsung/Kconfig
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 config SND_SOC_SAMSUNG
 	tristate "ASoC support for Samsung"
-	depends on ARCH_S3C2410 || ARCH_S3C64XX || ARCH_S5PC100 || ARCH_S5PV210 || ARCH_S5P64X0 || ARCH_S5P6442 || ARCH_EXYNOS4
+	depends on ARCH_S3C2410 || ARCH_S3C64XX || ARCH_S5PV210 || ARCH_S5P64X0 || ARCH_S5P6442 || ARCH_EXYNOS4
 	select S3C64XX_DMA if ARCH_S3C64XX
 	select S3C2410_DMA if ARCH_S3C2410
 	help
-- 
1.7.1

[PATCH 2/7] ASoC: Remove to support sound for S5PC100

[Jassi Brar]

On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 6:41 AM, Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> wrote:
> According to removing ARCH_S5PC100, we don't need to support
> sound for S5PC100.
>
> Cc: Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@gmail.com>
> Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
> Signed-off-by: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>
> ---
> ?sound/soc/samsung/Kconfig | ? ?2 +-

You might also want to remove smdkc100 support from
 sound/soc/samsung/smdk_wm9713.c
 sound/soc/samsung/smdk_wm8580.c
And three other references to smdkc100 in sound/soc/samsung/Kconfig

[PATCH 2/7] ASoC: Remove to support sound for S5PC100

[Kukjin Kim]

Jassi Brar wrote:
> 
> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 6:41 AM, Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> wrote:
> > According to removing ARCH_S5PC100, we don't need to support
> > sound for S5PC100.
> >
> > Cc: Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@gmail.com>
> > Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>
> > ---
> >  sound/soc/samsung/Kconfig |    2 +-
> 
Hi Jassi,

Oops...Yeah, you're right.
Thanks for your pointing out :)

Will update soon.

> You might also want to remove smdkc100 support from
>  sound/soc/samsung/smdk_wm9713.c
>  sound/soc/samsung/smdk_wm8580.c
> And three other references to smdkc100 in sound/soc/samsung/Kconfig

I found something for smdkc100 in smdk_wm8580.c but I'm not sure which should be removed in smdk_wm9713.c.

Thanks.

Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer,
SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.

[PATCH 2/7] ASoC: Remove to support sound for S5PC100

[Jassi Brar]

On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> wrote:

>> You might also want to remove smdkc100 support from
>> ?sound/soc/samsung/smdk_wm9713.c
>> ?sound/soc/samsung/smdk_wm8580.c
>> And three other references to smdkc100 in sound/soc/samsung/Kconfig
>
> I found something for smdkc100 in smdk_wm8580.c but I'm not sure which should be removed in smdk_wm9713.c.
>

Just the comment about jumper settings on smdkc100
otherwise it gives wrong impression that the board is supported.

[PATCH 2/7] ASoC: Remove to support sound for S5PC100

[Kukjin Kim]

Jassi Brar wrote:
> 
> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> wrote:
> 
> >> You might also want to remove smdkc100 support from
> >>  sound/soc/samsung/smdk_wm9713.c
> >>  sound/soc/samsung/smdk_wm8580.c
> >> And three other references to smdkc100 in sound/soc/samsung/Kconfig
> >
> > I found something for smdkc100 in smdk_wm8580.c but I'm not sure which
> should be removed in smdk_wm9713.c.
> >
> 
> Just the comment about jumper settings on smdkc100
> otherwise it gives wrong impression that the board is supported.

Ok, I agree.

But I'm not sure what is required for it.
Could you please let me know about it after discussion of removing C100?

Thanks.

Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer,
SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.

[PATCH 2/7] ASoC: Remove to support sound for S5PC100

[Jassi Brar]

On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> wrote:

>> > I found something for smdkc100 in smdk_wm8580.c but I'm not sure which
>> should be removed in smdk_wm9713.c.
>> >
>>
>> Just the comment about jumper settings on smdkc100
>> otherwise it gives wrong impression that the board is supported.
>
> Ok, I agree.
>
> But I'm not sure what is required for it.
> Could you please let me know about it after discussion of removing C100?

Simply doing this ....

diff --git a/sound/soc/samsung/smdk_wm9713.c b/sound/soc/samsung/smdk_wm9713.c
index ae5fed6..04ed8e4 100644
--- a/sound/soc/samsung/smdk_wm9713.c
+++ b/sound/soc/samsung/smdk_wm9713.c
@@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ static struct snd_soc_card smdk;
  * Default CFG switch settings to use this driver:
  *
  *   SMDK6410: Set CFG1 1-3 On, CFG2 1-4 Off
- *   SMDKC100: Set CFG6 1-3 On, CFG7 1   On
  *   SMDKC110: Set CFGB10 1-2 Off, CFGB12 1-3 On
  *   SMDKV210: Set CFGB10 1-2 Off, CFGB12 1-3 On
  *   SMDKV310: Set CFG2 1-2 Off, CFG4 All On, CFG7 All Off, CFG8 1-On


Thanks.

[PATCH 3/7] [media] s5p-fimc: Remove to support fimc for S5PC100

[Kukjin Kim]

According to removing ARCH_S5PC100, we don't need to support
fimc for S5PC100.

Cc: Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@samsung.com>
Cc: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@samsung.com>
Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>
---
 drivers/media/video/s5p-fimc/fimc-core.c |   14 --------------
 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/media/video/s5p-fimc/fimc-core.c b/drivers/media/video/s5p-fimc/fimc-core.c
index dc91a85..89d59d6 100644
--- a/drivers/media/video/s5p-fimc/fimc-core.c
+++ b/drivers/media/video/s5p-fimc/fimc-core.c
@@ -1871,17 +1871,6 @@ static struct samsung_fimc_variant fimc2_variant_exynos4 = {
 	.pix_limit	 = &s5p_pix_limit[3],
 };
 
-/* S5PC100 */
-static struct samsung_fimc_driverdata fimc_drvdata_s5p = {
-	.variant = {
-		[0] = &fimc0_variant_s5p,
-		[1] = &fimc0_variant_s5p,
-		[2] = &fimc2_variant_s5p,
-	},
-	.num_entities = 3,
-	.lclk_frequency = 133000000UL,
-};
-
 /* S5PV210, S5PC110 */
 static struct samsung_fimc_driverdata fimc_drvdata_s5pv210 = {
 	.variant = {
@@ -1907,9 +1896,6 @@ static struct samsung_fimc_driverdata fimc_drvdata_exynos4 = {
 
 static struct platform_device_id fimc_driver_ids[] = {
 	{
-		.name		= "s5p-fimc",
-		.driver_data	= (unsigned long)&fimc_drvdata_s5p,
-	}, {
 		.name		= "s5pv210-fimc",
 		.driver_data	= (unsigned long)&fimc_drvdata_s5pv210,
 	}, {
-- 
1.7.1

[PATCH 3/7] [media] s5p-fimc: Remove to support fimc for S5PC100

[Sylwester Nawrocki]

Hi Kukjin,

Shouldn't there be some deprecation period for whole s5pc100 support removal ?
It looks a bit rude to me that suddenly whole support for the SoC is vanished.
I know at least one active user of mainline FIMC driver @ s5pc100.

On 05/12/2011 03:11 AM, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> According to removing ARCH_S5PC100, we don't need to support
> fimc for S5PC100.
> 
> Cc: Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@samsung.com>
> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@samsung.com>
> Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@infradead.org>
> Signed-off-by: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>
> ---
>  drivers/media/video/s5p-fimc/fimc-core.c |   14 --------------
>  1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/media/video/s5p-fimc/fimc-core.c b/drivers/media/video/s5p-fimc/fimc-core.c
> index dc91a85..89d59d6 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/video/s5p-fimc/fimc-core.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/video/s5p-fimc/fimc-core.c
> @@ -1871,17 +1871,6 @@ static struct samsung_fimc_variant fimc2_variant_exynos4 = {
>  	.pix_limit	 = &s5p_pix_limit[3],
>  };
>  
> -/* S5PC100 */
> -static struct samsung_fimc_driverdata fimc_drvdata_s5p = {
> -	.variant = {
> -		[0] = &fimc0_variant_s5p,
> -		[1] = &fimc0_variant_s5p,
> -		[2] = &fimc2_variant_s5p,
> -	},
> -	.num_entities = 3,
> -	.lclk_frequency = 133000000UL,
> -};
> -
>  /* S5PV210, S5PC110 */
>  static struct samsung_fimc_driverdata fimc_drvdata_s5pv210 = {
>  	.variant = {
> @@ -1907,9 +1896,6 @@ static struct samsung_fimc_driverdata fimc_drvdata_exynos4 = {
>  
>  static struct platform_device_id fimc_driver_ids[] = {
>  	{
> -		.name		= "s5p-fimc",
> -		.driver_data	= (unsigned long)&fimc_drvdata_s5p,
> -	}, {
>  		.name		= "s5pv210-fimc",
>  		.driver_data	= (unsigned long)&fimc_drvdata_s5pv210,
>  	}, {

-- 
Sylwester Nawrocki
Samsung Poland R&D Center

[PATCH 3/7] [media] s5p-fimc: Remove to support fimc for S5PC100

[Kukjin Kim]

Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
> 
> Hi Kukjin,
> 
Hi,

> Shouldn't there be some deprecation period for whole s5pc100 support
removal ?

This is that. But I know, there is no time...

> It looks a bit rude to me that suddenly whole support for the SoC is
vanished.

Hmm...what did you think about my previous comments: 'removing some
"mach-s5pxxxx"s'?

> I know at least one active user of mainline FIMC driver @ s5pc100.

Do you _really_ want to keep it in later mainline?

I was not sure we should keep continually 6442 and C100 in mainline when I
decided to removing 'mach-s5pxxxx'.

Thanks.

Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer,
SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.

[PATCH 3/7] [media] s5p-fimc: Remove to support fimc for S5PC100

[Sylwester Nawrocki]

On 05/16/2011 09:15 AM, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
> 
>> Shouldn't there be some deprecation period for whole s5pc100 support
> removal ?
> 
> This is that. But I know, there is no time...
> 
>> It looks a bit rude to me that suddenly whole support for the SoC is
> vanished.
> 
> Hmm...what did you think about my previous comments: 'removing some
> "mach-s5pxxxx"s'?

I would expect one kernel release period of so notice for such a change.
But it doesn't have to be true in this specific case.

> 
>> I know at least one active user of mainline FIMC driver @ s5pc100.
> 
> Do you _really_ want to keep it in later mainline?

I don't personally have interest in maintaining this driver for s5pc100.
It just adds unnecessary complexity to my work and in fact I have limited
possibilities now to test the driver on s5pc100.
But if there are users and it really doesn't cost much to keep the support
for s5pc100 why bother to remove it?  Just to get rid of one mach-* directory ? 

> 
> I was not sure we should keep continually 6442 and C100 in mainline when I
> decided to removing 'mach-s5pxxxx'.

I really don't care about 6442, but what's the problem with s5pc100 ?
Is it being discontinued ? Or there is little users of it ?

I would much more like to see attempts to consolidate the code rather than
simply removing it.


Regards,
-- 
Sylwester Nawrocki
Samsung Poland R&D Center

[PATCH 3/7] [media] s5p-fimc: Remove to support fimc for S5PC100

[Kukjin Kim]

Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
> 
> On 05/16/2011 09:15 AM, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> > Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
> >
> >> Shouldn't there be some deprecation period for whole s5pc100 support
> > removal ?
> >
> > This is that. But I know, there is no time...
> >
> >> It looks a bit rude to me that suddenly whole support for the SoC is
> > vanished.
> >
> > Hmm...what did you think about my previous comments: 'removing some
> > "mach-s5pxxxx"s'?
> 
> I would expect one kernel release period of so notice for such a change.
> But it doesn't have to be true in this specific case.
> 
> >
> >> I know at least one active user of mainline FIMC driver @ s5pc100.
> >
> > Do you _really_ want to keep it in later mainline?
> 
> I don't personally have interest in maintaining this driver for s5pc100.
> It just adds unnecessary complexity to my work and in fact I have limited
> possibilities now to test the driver on s5pc100.
> But if there are users and it really doesn't cost much to keep the support
> for s5pc100 why bother to remove it?  Just to get rid of one mach-*
directory ?
> 
> >
> > I was not sure we should keep continually 6442 and C100 in mainline when
I
> > decided to removing 'mach-s5pxxxx'.
> 
> I really don't care about 6442, but what's the problem with s5pc100 ?
> Is it being discontinued ? Or there is little users of it ?
> 
> I would much more like to see attempts to consolidate the code rather than
> simply removing it.
> 
Hi Sylwester,

Thanks for your opinion :)
Please refer to my reply on this thread.

Thanks.

Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer,
SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.

[PATCH 3/7] [media] s5p-fimc: Remove to support fimc for S5PC100

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

Em 11-05-2011 22:11, Kukjin Kim escreveu:
> According to removing ARCH_S5PC100, we don't need to support
> fimc for S5PC100.

NACK

There's nothing mentioning the removal of ARCH_S5PC100 or the
corresponding bits at feature-removal-schedule.txt:

$ grep -i s5pc100 Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt 
$ 

Mauro.

> 
> Cc: Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@samsung.com>
> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@samsung.com>
> Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@infradead.org>
> Signed-off-by: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>
> ---
>  drivers/media/video/s5p-fimc/fimc-core.c |   14 --------------
>  1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/media/video/s5p-fimc/fimc-core.c b/drivers/media/video/s5p-fimc/fimc-core.c
> index dc91a85..89d59d6 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/video/s5p-fimc/fimc-core.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/video/s5p-fimc/fimc-core.c
> @@ -1871,17 +1871,6 @@ static struct samsung_fimc_variant fimc2_variant_exynos4 = {
>  	.pix_limit	 = &s5p_pix_limit[3],
>  };
>  
> -/* S5PC100 */
> -static struct samsung_fimc_driverdata fimc_drvdata_s5p = {
> -	.variant = {
> -		[0] = &fimc0_variant_s5p,
> -		[1] = &fimc0_variant_s5p,
> -		[2] = &fimc2_variant_s5p,
> -	},
> -	.num_entities = 3,
> -	.lclk_frequency = 133000000UL,
> -};
> -
>  /* S5PV210, S5PC110 */
>  static struct samsung_fimc_driverdata fimc_drvdata_s5pv210 = {
>  	.variant = {
> @@ -1907,9 +1896,6 @@ static struct samsung_fimc_driverdata fimc_drvdata_exynos4 = {
>  
>  static struct platform_device_id fimc_driver_ids[] = {
>  	{
> -		.name		= "s5p-fimc",
> -		.driver_data	= (unsigned long)&fimc_drvdata_s5p,
> -	}, {
>  		.name		= "s5pv210-fimc",
>  		.driver_data	= (unsigned long)&fimc_drvdata_s5pv210,
>  	}, {

[PATCH 4/7] mtd: OneNAND: Remove to support onenand for S5PC100

[Kukjin Kim]

According to removing ARCH_S5PC100, we don't need to support
onenand for S5PC100.

Cc: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@samsung.com>
Cc: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>
---
 drivers/mtd/onenand/Kconfig   |    4 ++--
 drivers/mtd/onenand/samsung.c |   25 +------------------------
 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/mtd/onenand/Kconfig b/drivers/mtd/onenand/Kconfig
index 4f42619..f32679f 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/onenand/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/mtd/onenand/Kconfig
@@ -32,10 +32,10 @@ config MTD_ONENAND_OMAP2
 
 config MTD_ONENAND_SAMSUNG
         tristate "OneNAND on Samsung SOC controller support"
-        depends on ARCH_S3C64XX || ARCH_S5PC100 || ARCH_S5PV210 || ARCH_EXYNOS4
+        depends on ARCH_S3C64XX || ARCH_S5PV210 || ARCH_EXYNOS4
         help
           Support for a OneNAND flash device connected to an Samsung SOC.
-          S3C64XX/S5PC100 use command mapping method.
+          S3C64XX use command mapping method.
           S5PC110/S5PC210 use generic OneNAND method.
 
 config MTD_ONENAND_OTP
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/onenand/samsung.c b/drivers/mtd/onenand/samsung.c
index a4c74a9..3117838 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/onenand/samsung.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/onenand/samsung.c
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
  * published by the Free Software Foundation.
  *
  * Implementation:
- *	S3C64XX and S5PC100: emulate the pseudo BufferRAM
+ *	S3C64XX: emulate the pseudo BufferRAM
  *	S5PC110: use DMA
  */
 
@@ -32,7 +32,6 @@
 enum soc_type {
 	TYPE_S3C6400,
 	TYPE_S3C6410,
-	TYPE_S5PC100,
 	TYPE_S5PC110,
 };
 
@@ -59,7 +58,6 @@ enum soc_type {
 #define MAP_11				(0x3)
 
 #define S3C64XX_CMD_MAP_SHIFT		24
-#define S5PC100_CMD_MAP_SHIFT		26
 
 #define S3C6400_FBA_SHIFT		10
 #define S3C6400_FPA_SHIFT		4
@@ -69,10 +67,6 @@ enum soc_type {
 #define S3C6410_FPA_SHIFT		6
 #define S3C6410_FSA_SHIFT		4
 
-#define S5PC100_FBA_SHIFT		13
-#define S5PC100_FPA_SHIFT		7
-#define S5PC100_FSA_SHIFT		5
-
 /* S5PC110 specific definitions */
 #define S5PC110_DMA_SRC_ADDR		0x400
 #define S5PC110_DMA_SRC_CFG		0x404
@@ -202,11 +196,6 @@ static unsigned int s3c64xx_cmd_map(unsigned type, unsigned val)
 	return (type << S3C64XX_CMD_MAP_SHIFT) | val;
 }
 
-static unsigned int s5pc1xx_cmd_map(unsigned type, unsigned val)
-{
-	return (type << S5PC100_CMD_MAP_SHIFT) | val;
-}
-
 static unsigned int s3c6400_mem_addr(int fba, int fpa, int fsa)
 {
 	return (fba << S3C6400_FBA_SHIFT) | (fpa << S3C6400_FPA_SHIFT) |
@@ -219,12 +208,6 @@ static unsigned int s3c6410_mem_addr(int fba, int fpa, int fsa)
 		(fsa << S3C6410_FSA_SHIFT);
 }
 
-static unsigned int s5pc100_mem_addr(int fba, int fpa, int fsa)
-{
-	return (fba << S5PC100_FBA_SHIFT) | (fpa << S5PC100_FPA_SHIFT) |
-		(fsa << S5PC100_FSA_SHIFT);
-}
-
 static void s3c_onenand_reset(void)
 {
 	unsigned long timeout = 0x10000;
@@ -842,9 +825,6 @@ static void s3c_onenand_setup(struct mtd_info *mtd)
 	} else if (onenand->type == TYPE_S3C6410) {
 		onenand->mem_addr = s3c6410_mem_addr;
 		onenand->cmd_map = s3c64xx_cmd_map;
-	} else if (onenand->type == TYPE_S5PC100) {
-		onenand->mem_addr = s5pc100_mem_addr;
-		onenand->cmd_map = s5pc1xx_cmd_map;
 	} else if (onenand->type == TYPE_S5PC110) {
 		/* Use generic onenand functions */
 		this->read_bufferram = s5pc110_read_bufferram;
@@ -1127,9 +1107,6 @@ static struct platform_device_id s3c_onenand_driver_ids[] = {
 		.name		= "s3c6410-onenand",
 		.driver_data	= TYPE_S3C6410,
 	}, {
-		.name		= "s5pc100-onenand",
-		.driver_data	= TYPE_S5PC100,
-	}, {
 		.name		= "s5pc110-onenand",
 		.driver_data	= TYPE_S5PC110,
 	}, { },
-- 
1.7.1

[PATCH 5/7] tty: Remove to support serial for S5PC100

[Kukjin Kim]

According to removing ARCH_S5PC100, we don't need to support
serial for S5PC100.

Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh at suse.de
Signed-off-by: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>
---
 drivers/tty/serial/Kconfig |    8 ++++----
 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/Kconfig b/drivers/tty/serial/Kconfig
index 80484af..28c4f1a 100644
--- a/drivers/tty/serial/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/tty/serial/Kconfig
@@ -527,13 +527,13 @@ config SERIAL_S3C24A0
 	  Serial port support for the Samsung S3C24A0 SoC
 
 config SERIAL_S3C6400
-	tristate "Samsung S3C6400/S3C6410/S5P6440/S5P6450/S5PC100 Serial port support"
-	depends on SERIAL_SAMSUNG && (CPU_S3C6400 || CPU_S3C6410 || CPU_S5P6440 || CPU_S5P6450 || CPU_S5PC100)
+	tristate "Samsung S3C6400/S3C6410/S5P6440/S5P6450 Serial port support"
+	depends on SERIAL_SAMSUNG && (CPU_S3C6400 || CPU_S3C6410 || CPU_S5P6440 || CPU_S5P6450)
 	select SERIAL_SAMSUNG_UARTS_4
 	default y
 	help
-	  Serial port support for the Samsung S3C6400, S3C6410, S5P6440, S5P6450
-	  and S5PC100 SoCs
+	  Serial port support for the Samsung S3C6400, S3C6410, S5P6440
+	  and S5P6450 SoCs
 
 config SERIAL_S5PV210
 	tristate "Samsung S5PV210 Serial port support"
-- 
1.7.1

[PATCH 6/7] video: s3c-fb: Remove to support fb for S5PC100

[Kukjin Kim]

According to removing ARCH_S5PC100, we don't need to support
fb for S5PC100.

Cc: Ben Dooks <ben-linux@fluff.org>
Cc: Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>
Signed-off-by: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>
---
 drivers/video/s3c-fb.c |   33 ---------------------------------
 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/video/s3c-fb.c b/drivers/video/s3c-fb.c
index 3b6cdca..9928c7e 100644
--- a/drivers/video/s3c-fb.c
+++ b/drivers/video/s3c-fb.c
@@ -1696,36 +1696,6 @@ static struct s3c_fb_driverdata s3c_fb_data_64xx = {
 	.win[4]	= &s3c_fb_data_64xx_wins[4],
 };
 
-static struct s3c_fb_driverdata s3c_fb_data_s5pc100 = {
-	.variant = {
-		.nr_windows	= 5,
-		.vidtcon	= VIDTCON0,
-		.wincon		= WINCON(0),
-		.winmap		= WINxMAP(0),
-		.keycon		= WKEYCON,
-		.osd		= VIDOSD_BASE,
-		.osd_stride	= 16,
-		.buf_start	= VIDW_BUF_START(0),
-		.buf_size	= VIDW_BUF_SIZE(0),
-		.buf_end	= VIDW_BUF_END(0),
-
-		.palette = {
-			[0] = 0x2400,
-			[1] = 0x2800,
-			[2] = 0x2c00,
-			[3] = 0x3000,
-			[4] = 0x3400,
-		},
-
-		.has_prtcon	= 1,
-	},
-	.win[0]	= &s3c_fb_data_64xx_wins[0],
-	.win[1]	= &s3c_fb_data_64xx_wins[1],
-	.win[2]	= &s3c_fb_data_64xx_wins[2],
-	.win[3]	= &s3c_fb_data_64xx_wins[3],
-	.win[4]	= &s3c_fb_data_64xx_wins[4],
-};
-
 static struct s3c_fb_driverdata s3c_fb_data_s5pv210 = {
 	.variant = {
 		.nr_windows	= 5,
@@ -1797,9 +1767,6 @@ static struct platform_device_id s3c_fb_driver_ids[] = {
 		.name		= "s3c-fb",
 		.driver_data	= (unsigned long)&s3c_fb_data_64xx,
 	}, {
-		.name		= "s5pc100-fb",
-		.driver_data	= (unsigned long)&s3c_fb_data_s5pc100,
-	}, {
 		.name		= "s5pv210-fb",
 		.driver_data	= (unsigned long)&s3c_fb_data_s5pv210,
 	}, {
-- 
1.7.1

[PATCH 7/7] libata: Remove to support pata for S5PC100

[Kukjin Kim]

According to removing ARCH_S5PC100, we don't need to support
pata for S5PC100.

Cc: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
Signed-off-by: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>
---
 drivers/ata/pata_samsung_cf.c |   13 -------------
 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/ata/pata_samsung_cf.c b/drivers/ata/pata_samsung_cf.c
index c446ae6..5c35f21 100644
--- a/drivers/ata/pata_samsung_cf.c
+++ b/drivers/ata/pata_samsung_cf.c
@@ -31,7 +31,6 @@
 
 enum s3c_cpu_type {
 	TYPE_S3C64XX,
-	TYPE_S5PC100,
 	TYPE_S5PV210,
 };
 
@@ -453,10 +452,6 @@ static void pata_s3c_hwinit(struct s3c_ide_info *info,
 		writel(0x1b, info->ide_addr + S3C_ATA_IRQ_MSK);
 		break;
 
-	case TYPE_S5PC100:
-		pata_s3c_cfg_mode(info->sfr_addr);
-		/* FALLTHROUGH */
-
 	case TYPE_S5PV210:
 		/* Configure as little endian */
 		pata_s3c_set_endian(info->ide_addr, 0);
@@ -538,11 +533,6 @@ static int __init pata_s3c_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 		info->sfr_addr = info->ide_addr + 0x1800;
 		info->ide_addr += 0x1900;
 		info->fifo_status_reg = 0x94;
-	} else if (cpu_type == TYPE_S5PC100) {
-		ap->ops = &pata_s5p_port_ops;
-		info->sfr_addr = info->ide_addr + 0x1800;
-		info->ide_addr += 0x1900;
-		info->fifo_status_reg = 0x84;
 	} else {
 		ap->ops = &pata_s5p_port_ops;
 		info->fifo_status_reg = 0x84;
@@ -640,9 +630,6 @@ static struct platform_device_id pata_s3c_driver_ids[] = {
 		.name		= "s3c64xx-pata",
 		.driver_data	= TYPE_S3C64XX,
 	}, {
-		.name		= "s5pc100-pata",
-		.driver_data	= TYPE_S5PC100,
-	}, {
 		.name		= "s5pv210-pata",
 		.driver_data	= TYPE_S5PV210,
 	},
-- 
1.7.1

[PATCH 7/7] libata: Remove to support pata for S5PC100

[Jeff Garzik]

On 05/11/2011 09:11 PM, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> According to removing ARCH_S5PC100, we don't need to support
> pata for S5PC100.
>
> Cc: Jeff Garzik<jgarzik@pobox.com>
> Signed-off-by: Kukjin Kim<kgene.kim@samsung.com>

Acked-by: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@redhat.com>

[PATCH 0/7] ARM: Removing ARCH_S5PC100

[Vasily Khoruzhick]

On Thursday 12 May 2011 04:11:07 Kukjin Kim wrote:
> This patch remvoes mach-s5pc100 directory for ARCH_S5PC100 in arch/arm.

Hm, what's the point of removing this code?

> If any problems, please let me know immediately.
> 
> [PATCH 1/7] ARM: S5PC100: Removing ARCH_S5PC100
> [PATCH 2/7] ASoC: Remove to support sound for S5PC100
> [PATCH 3/7] [media] s5p-fimc: Remove to support fimc for S5PC100
> [PATCH 4/7] mtd: OneNAND: Remove to support onenand for S5PC100
> [PATCH 5/7] tty: Remove to support serial for S5PC100
> [PATCH 6/7] video: s3c-fb: Remove to support fb for S5PC100
> [PATCH 7/7] libata: Remove to support pata for S5PC100

[PATCH 0/7] ARM: Removing ARCH_S5PC100

[Marek Szyprowski]

Hello,

On Friday, May 13, 2011 2:56 PM Vasily Khoruzhick wrote:

> On Thursday 12 May 2011 04:11:07 Kukjin Kim wrote:
> > This patch remvoes mach-s5pc100 directory for ARCH_S5PC100 in arch/arm.
> 
> Hm, what's the point of removing this code?

May I also ask the same? What's the point in removing WORKING support for
the whole SoC series? There are some S5PC100 based boards available on the
market and they are still being used for embedded Linux development.

The issues with ARM kernel tree is not about the number of supported
SoCs/sub-platform but the fact that a lots of code is somehow duplicated
between different arm sub-architecture. The goal is to identify such code
and unify it. There have been a lot of discussion about this on Linaro
Meeting in Budapest. For more information please take a look at etherpad
notes available here:

http://summit.ubuntu.com/uds-o/track/linaro-kernel/

(etherpad links for each session are available via 'notepad' image near
the session title).

I recommend to read all the notes from all five 'Arm Linus Interface'
sessions. 

Best regards
-- 
Marek Szyprowski
Samsung Poland R&D Center

[PATCH 0/7] ARM: Removing ARCH_S5PC100

[Kukjin Kim]

Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
Hi :)

> On Friday, May 13, 2011 2:56 PM Vasily Khoruzhick wrote:
> 
> > On Thursday 12 May 2011 04:11:07 Kukjin Kim wrote:
> > > This patch remvoes mach-s5pc100 directory for ARCH_S5PC100 in
arch/arm.
> >
> > Hm, what's the point of removing this code?
> 
> May I also ask the same? What's the point in removing WORKING support for
> the whole SoC series? There are some S5PC100 based boards available on the
> market and they are still being used for embedded Linux development.
> 
> The issues with ARM kernel tree is not about the number of supported
> SoCs/sub-platform but the fact that a lots of code is somehow duplicated
> between different arm sub-architecture. The goal is to identify such code
> and unify it. There have been a lot of discussion about this on Linaro
> Meeting in Budapest. For more information please take a look at etherpad
> notes available here:
> 
> http://summit.ubuntu.com/uds-o/track/linaro-kernel/
> 
> (etherpad links for each session are available via 'notepad' image near
> the session title).
> 
> I recommend to read all the notes from all five 'Arm Linus Interface'
> sessions.
> 

I think, we already discussed about this :)
Hope please refer other my reply on this thread.

Ok, will check about discussion result in last UDS.

Thanks.

Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer,
SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.

[PATCH 0/7] ARM: Removing ARCH_S5PC100

[Nick Pelling]

At 10:11 12/05/2011 +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote:
>This patch remvoes mach-s5pc100 directory for ARCH_S5PC100 in arch/arm.
>If any problems, please let me know immediately.

Yes, this is a *big* problem for me as I'm actively working on mach-s5pc100.

Unless you happen to know differently, the S5PC100 is still in mass 
production, and the security cameras my company make all use the 
S5PC100. There are also a number of other embedded modules currently 
in production based on the S5PC100.

What reason would you have for removing mach-s5pc100 from Linux? 

[PATCH 0/7] ARM: Removing ARCH_S5PC100

[Kukjin Kim]

Nick Pelling wrote:
> 
> At 10:11 12/05/2011 +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> >This patch remvoes mach-s5pc100 directory for ARCH_S5PC100 in arch/arm.
> >If any problems, please let me know immediately.
> 
> Yes, this is a *big* problem for me as I'm actively working on
mach-s5pc100.
> 
> Unless you happen to know differently, the S5PC100 is still in mass
> production, and the security cameras my company make all use the
> S5PC100. There are also a number of other embedded modules currently
> in production based on the S5PC100.
> 
> What reason would you have for removing mach-s5pc100 from Linux?

Thanks for your opinion :)

Yes, I think it's rather premature to decide it at this time.
So this is dropped now and will merge with other samsung stuff next time ;)

Thanks.

Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer,
SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.

[PATCH 0/7] ARM: Removing ARCH_S5PC100

[Vasily Khoruzhick]

On Wednesday 18 May 2011 11:53:22 Kukjin Kim wrote:

> Thanks for your opinion :)
> 
> Yes, I think it's rather premature to decide it at this time.
> So this is dropped now and will merge with other samsung stuff next time ;)

Still see to reason to drop s5pc100 support from mainline (even not now, but 
later)

Regards
Vasily

[PATCH 0/7] ARM: Removing ARCH_S5PC100

[Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD]

HI,

	why do you remove it?

Best Regards,
J.
On 10:11 Thu 12 May     , Kukjin Kim wrote:
> This patch remvoes mach-s5pc100 directory for ARCH_S5PC100 in arch/arm.
> 
> If any problems, please let me know immediately.
> 
> [PATCH 1/7] ARM: S5PC100: Removing ARCH_S5PC100
> [PATCH 2/7] ASoC: Remove to support sound for S5PC100
> [PATCH 3/7] [media] s5p-fimc: Remove to support fimc for S5PC100
> [PATCH 4/7] mtd: OneNAND: Remove to support onenand for S5PC100
> [PATCH 5/7] tty: Remove to support serial for S5PC100
> [PATCH 6/7] video: s3c-fb: Remove to support fb for S5PC100
> [PATCH 7/7] libata: Remove to support pata for S5PC100
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

[PATCH 0/7] ARM: Removing ARCH_S5PC100

[Kukjin Kim]

Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> 
> HI,
> 
Hi,

> 	why do you remove it?
> 
Thanks for your concerns :)

I think it's rather premature to decide it at this time.
So this is dropped at this moment...but as a note, I will implement this
into other samsung stuff next time :)

Thanks.

Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer,
SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.

> On 10:11 Thu 12 May     , Kukjin Kim wrote:
> > This patch remvoes mach-s5pc100 directory for ARCH_S5PC100 in arch/arm.
> >
> > If any problems, please let me know immediately.
> >
> > [PATCH 1/7] ARM: S5PC100: Removing ARCH_S5PC100
> > [PATCH 2/7] ASoC: Remove to support sound for S5PC100
> > [PATCH 3/7] [media] s5p-fimc: Remove to support fimc for S5PC100
> > [PATCH 4/7] mtd: OneNAND: Remove to support onenand for S5PC100
> > [PATCH 5/7] tty: Remove to support serial for S5PC100
> > [PATCH 6/7] video: s3c-fb: Remove to support fb for S5PC100
> > [PATCH 7/7] libata: Remove to support pata for S5PC100

[PATCH 0/7] ARM: Removing ARCH_S5PC100

[Yauhen Kharuzhy]

On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 05:44:03PM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> > 
> > HI,
> > 
> Hi,
> 
> > 	why do you remove it?
> > 
> Thanks for your concerns :)
> 
> I think it's rather premature to decide it at this time.
> So this is dropped at this moment...but as a note, I will implement this
> into other samsung stuff next time :)

I think that we should implement SoC support with more unified way
_before_ removing working code, not after.

> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Best regards,
> Kgene.
> --
> Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer,
> SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
> 
> > On 10:11 Thu 12 May     , Kukjin Kim wrote:
> > > This patch remvoes mach-s5pc100 directory for ARCH_S5PC100 in arch/arm.
> > >
> > > If any problems, please let me know immediately.
> > >
> > > [PATCH 1/7] ARM: S5PC100: Removing ARCH_S5PC100
> > > [PATCH 2/7] ASoC: Remove to support sound for S5PC100
> > > [PATCH 3/7] [media] s5p-fimc: Remove to support fimc for S5PC100
> > > [PATCH 4/7] mtd: OneNAND: Remove to support onenand for S5PC100
> > > [PATCH 5/7] tty: Remove to support serial for S5PC100
> > > [PATCH 6/7] video: s3c-fb: Remove to support fb for S5PC100
> > > [PATCH 7/7] libata: Remove to support pata for S5PC100
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

-- 
Yauhen Kharuzhy		jekhor _at_ gmail.com
			JID: jek at jabber.ru
			skype: jekhor

A: No
Q: Should I quote below my post?

[PATCH 0/7] ARM: Removing ARCH_S5PC100

[Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD]

On 12:36 Wed 18 May     , Yauhen Kharuzhy wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 05:44:03PM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> > Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> > > 
> > > HI,
> > > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > > 	why do you remove it?
> > > 
> > Thanks for your concerns :)
> > 
> > I think it's rather premature to decide it at this time.
> > So this is dropped at this moment...but as a note, I will implement this
> > into other samsung stuff next time :)
> 
> I think that we should implement SoC support with more unified way
> _before_ removing working code, not after.
agreed for my point of view NACK to remove working code

Russell do you agree?

Best Regards,
J.