From: Chris Newport <crn@netunix.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: sammy@sammy.net, sfr@canb.auug.org.au,
microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au,
devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
julian.calaby@gmail.com, wmb@firmworks.com,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/12] Merge common OpenFirmware device tree code
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 02:29:25 +0100 (BST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.60.0910080155210.12519@mailgate.netunix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091007.140938.255120957.davem@davemloft.net>
On Wed, 7 Oct 2009, David Miller wrote:
>> Sun4c has also been broken for a long time and sun4d has never worked
>> properly. Is it time to also prune these ?.
>> That would leave only Sun4m in the 32bit kernel, which still works and
>> has plenty of ongoing user interest.
>
> Chris don't over-exaggerate the state.
>
> The truth is that the whole sparc32 port is in a state of mild
> disrepair, and many of the issues apply to all the port rather than
> just one family of systems. I think someone suitably motivated
> could get most of the bugs sorted out.
>
> There is no reason to drop support for SS1 machines, we already fully
> build the software device tree and use all of the generic OF
> infrastructure in the Linux kernel on those systems. It is not a road
> block at all for the OF genericization work, if that's what you read
> into wmb's email.
Your call, as you say there is little to be gained other than tidyness.
FWIW my opinions (and ICBW) are based on :-
Sun4c machines have a max of 48 or 64Mb and very few are still working
Sun4d has never had SMP support and this is apparantly problematic
due to Cray interlectual property causing a lack of bus documentation.
Running these heavy and power hungry lumps UP is a bit silly.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-08 1:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-07 4:29 [RFC PATCH 00/12] Merge common OpenFirmware device tree code Grant Likely
2009-10-07 4:30 ` [RFC PATCH 01/12] of: Rework linux/of.h and asm/prom.h include ordering Grant Likely
2009-10-07 4:30 ` [RFC PATCH 02/12] of: merge phandle, ihandle and struct property Grant Likely
2009-10-07 4:30 ` [RFC PATCH 03/12] of: merge struct device_node Grant Likely
2009-10-07 4:30 ` [RFC PATCH 04/12] of: Move OF_IS_DYNAMIC and OF_MARK_DYNAMIC macros to of.h Grant Likely
2009-10-07 4:30 ` [RFC PATCH 05/12] of: add common header for flattened device tree representation Grant Likely
2009-10-07 4:57 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-10-07 12:14 ` [microblaze-uclinux] " Michal Simek
2009-10-07 13:38 ` Grant Likely
2009-10-07 14:07 ` Michal Simek
2009-10-07 5:14 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2009-10-07 13:41 ` Grant Likely
2009-10-09 6:35 ` David Gibson
2009-10-09 7:07 ` Grant Likely
2009-10-14 4:47 ` David Gibson
2009-10-07 4:31 ` [RFC PATCH 06/12] of: merge struct boot_param_header from Microblaze and PowerPC Grant Likely
2009-10-07 4:31 ` [RFC PATCH 07/12] of: merge of_node_*_flag() and set_node_proc_entry() Grant Likely
2009-10-07 4:31 ` [RFC PATCH 08/12] of: merge of_read_number() an of_read_ulong() Grant Likely
2009-10-07 4:31 ` [RFC PATCH 09/12] of: merge of_node_get(), of_node_put() and of_find_all_nodes() Grant Likely
2009-10-07 4:32 ` [RFC PATCH 10/12] of: merge of_*_flat_dt*() functions Grant Likely
2009-10-09 6:36 ` David Gibson
2009-10-09 7:03 ` Grant Likely
2009-10-07 4:32 ` [RFC PATCH 11/12] of: merge other miscellaneous prototypes Grant Likely
2009-10-07 4:32 ` [RFC PATCH 12/12] of: merge of_find_all_nodes() implementations Grant Likely
2009-10-07 4:49 ` [RFC PATCH 00/12] Merge common OpenFirmware device tree code Grant Likely
2009-10-07 5:18 ` Julian Calaby
2009-10-07 13:52 ` Sam Creasey
2009-10-07 19:30 ` Mitch Bradley
2009-10-07 20:54 ` Chris Newport
2009-10-07 21:09 ` David Miller
2009-10-08 1:29 ` Chris Newport [this message]
2009-10-08 4:39 ` David Miller
2009-10-08 13:24 ` Kjetil Oftedal
2009-10-07 22:57 ` Brad Boyer
2009-10-07 7:09 ` Rob Landley
2009-10-07 14:02 ` Grant Likely
2009-10-07 14:21 ` [microblaze-uclinux] " Michal Simek
2009-10-07 7:27 ` David Miller
2009-10-07 16:39 ` Stephen Neuendorffer
2009-10-07 9:02 ` Wolfram Sang
2009-10-15 1:00 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-10-15 1:01 ` [PATCH 1/2] of: create asm/of.h Stephen Rothwell
2009-10-15 1:02 ` [PATCH 2/2] of: move struct property to asm/of.h Stephen Rothwell
2009-10-15 17:06 ` [RFC PATCH 00/12] Merge common OpenFirmware device tree code Grant Likely
2009-10-15 23:38 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-10-16 3:18 ` Grant Likely
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=Pine.LNX.4.60.0910080155210.12519@mailgate.netunix.com \
--to=crn@netunix.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=julian.calaby@gmail.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au \
--cc=sammy@sammy.net \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=wmb@firmworks.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).