ARCH=ppc vs ARCH=powerpc

ARCH=ppc vs ARCH=powerpc

[Mark Fortescue]

Hi,

I have noticed and read a few comments regarding the demise of ARCH=ppc.

Having two PowerPC arcitectures and only supprting one of them makes 
little sense. Is it not time to migrate (where required) the remaining 
code from arch/ppc to arch/powerpc and asm-ppc to asm-powerpc. There are 
not many files left that are unique to ARCH=ppc so it should not take too 
long.

For me, the requirement is to keep support for the cards indicated in 
arch/ppc/config/xxx_defconfig (as I have one that I might what to use with 
linux) in the same way as they are supported in ARCH=ppc.

I have just made some tweeks to get ARCH=ppc building for me but I still 
need to sort out what is required to get around *** Error: Headers not 
exportable for this architecture (ppc).

Regards
 	Mark Fortescue.

Re: ARCH=ppc vs ARCH=powerpc

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Friday 06 July 2007, Mark Fortescue wrote:
> For me, the requirement is to keep support for the cards indicated in 
> arch/ppc/config/xxx_defconfig (as I have one that I might what to use with 
> linux) in the same way as they are supported in ARCH=ppc.

The one thing that is holding up the transition to arch/powerpc is lack
of people with access to the respective boards. If you have one board
that you care about, it would be good if you look into getting it moved
over. Tell us if you have problems doing so. It shouldn't be all that
hard any more, and if it is, maybe some documentation is missing.

> I have just made some tweeks to get ARCH=ppc building for me but I still 
> need to sort out what is required to get around *** Error: Headers not 
> exportable for this architecture (ppc).

You should simply install the headers with ARCH=powerc, even when the
kernel is built with ARCH=ppc. From the user space point of view, there
is only one set of headers.

	Arnd <><

Re: ARCH=ppc vs ARCH=powerpc

[Josh Boyer]

On Mon, 2007-07-09 at 02:34 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Friday 06 July 2007, Mark Fortescue wrote:
> > For me, the requirement is to keep support for the cards indicated in 
> > arch/ppc/config/xxx_defconfig (as I have one that I might what to use with 
> > linux) in the same way as they are supported in ARCH=ppc.
> 
> The one thing that is holding up the transition to arch/powerpc is lack
> of people with access to the respective boards. If you have one board
> that you care about, it would be good if you look into getting it moved
> over. Tell us if you have problems doing so. It shouldn't be all that
> hard any more, and if it is, maybe some documentation is missing.

It's not just lack of boards.  It's lack of understanding of the
requirements to get a board port into arch/powerpc.  Namely, the device
tree stuff.

josh

Re: ARCH=ppc vs ARCH=powerpc

[Josh Boyer]

On Fri, 2007-07-06 at 17:21 +0100, Mark Fortescue wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I have noticed and read a few comments regarding the demise of ARCH=ppc.
> 
> Having two PowerPC arcitectures and only supprting one of them makes 
> little sense. Is it not time to migrate (where required) the remaining 
> code from arch/ppc to arch/powerpc and asm-ppc to asm-powerpc. There are 
> not many files left that are unique to ARCH=ppc so it should not take too 
> long.

It was started in 2005.  It's taken too long already.

Bug fixes will still be taken until arch/ppc dies.  New platform/board
support, no.

josh

Re: ARCH=ppc vs ARCH=powerpc

[Mark Fortescue]

Hi All,

I am currently trying to identify an anoying feature of linux on my 
sparc32 systems but I will do some work on the ppc -> powerpc migration 
as soon as I have exauhsted my current avenues of investiation on the 
sparc32 issue.

Regards
 	Mark Fortescue.

On Mon, 9 Jul 2007, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

> On Friday 06 July 2007, Mark Fortescue wrote:
>> For me, the requirement is to keep support for the cards indicated in
>> arch/ppc/config/xxx_defconfig (as I have one that I might what to use with
>> linux) in the same way as they are supported in ARCH=ppc.
>
> The one thing that is holding up the transition to arch/powerpc is lack
> of people with access to the respective boards. If you have one board
> that you care about, it would be good if you look into getting it moved
> over. Tell us if you have problems doing so. It shouldn't be all that
> hard any more, and if it is, maybe some documentation is missing.
>
>> I have just made some tweeks to get ARCH=ppc building for me but I still
>> need to sort out what is required to get around *** Error: Headers not
>> exportable for this architecture (ppc).
>
> You should simply install the headers with ARCH=powerc, even when the
> kernel is built with ARCH=ppc. From the user space point of view, there
> is only one set of headers.
>
> 	Arnd <><
>