Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Drop support for Renesas H8/300 architecture

Guenter Roeck
2013-09-03T20:59:30Z

On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 08:39:38PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 11:52:17AM +0800, Chen Gang F T wrote:
>
> > extreme sample: let 'kernel code style' and 'gcc code style' in one file, that will make the code very ugly.
>
> gcc style will make any code very ugly, no matter what (if anything) else is
> in the same file...
>
> [digs out the ports history table]
> x86: 0.01 [alive]
> i386: 0.01..2.6.24-rc1 [folded into x86]
> x86_64: 2.5.5-pre1..2.6.24-rc1 [folded into x86]
> x86: 2.6.24-rc1 [alive]
> alpha: 1.1.67 [alive]
> sparc: 1.1.77 [alive]
> sparc64: 2.1.19..2.6.28 [folded into sparc]
> mips: 1.1.82 [alive]
> mips64: 2.3.48-pre2..2.6.0-test2 [folded into mips]
> powerpc: 1.3.45 [alive]
> ppc: 1.3.45..2.6.26 [folded into powerpc]
> ppc64: 2.5.5..2.6.15-rc1 [folded into powerpc]
> powerpc: 2.6.15-rc1 [alive]
> m68k: 1.3.94 [alive]
> m68knommu: 2.5.46..2.6.38 [folded into m68k]
> arm: 2.1.80 [alive]
> arm26: 2.5.71..2.6.23-rc2 [gone]
> arm64: 3.7-rc1 [alive][might eventually fold]
> sh: 2.3.16 [alive]
> sh64: 2.6.8-rc1..2.6.24 [folded into sh, nearly dead there]
> ia64: 2.3.43-pre1 [alive]
> s390: 2.3.99pre8 [alive]
> s390x: 2.5.0..2.5.67 [folded into s390]
> parisc: 2.4.0-test12 [alive]
> cris: 2.5.0 [alive]
> um: 2.5.35 [alive]
> v850: 2.5.46..2.6.26 [gone]
> h8300: 2.5.68 [moderately responsive]
> m32r: 2.6.9-rc3 [alive]
> frv: 2.6.11-rc1 [alive]
> xtensa: 2.6.13-rc1 [alive]
> avr32: 2.6.19-rc1 [alive]
> blackfin: 2.6.22-rc1 [alive]
> mn10300: 2.6.25-rc1 [alive]
> microblaze: 2.6.30-rc2 [alive]
> score: 2.6.32-rc1 [abandoned][cloned off mips]
> tile: 2.6.36-rc1 [alive]
> unicore32: 2.6.39-rc1 [alive][cloned off arm]
> openrisc: 3.1-rc1 [alive]
> hexagon: 3.2-rc1 [alive]
> c6x: 3.3-rc1 [alive]
> arc: 3.9-rc1 [alive]
> metag: 3.9-rc1 [alive]
>
> Frankly, I would've expected score and lefotvers of sh64 (aka sh5) to be
> the first against the wall - h8300 was a bit surprising...
>

Great summary.

There seemed to be a consensus to remove h8300, at least so far and sufficiently
enough for me to ask Stephen to add the removal branch to linux-next.
We'll see if that triggers any further responses.

With score, I am not entirely sure. I got one Ack for the removal, but
on the other side the score maintainers came back and claimed they would
still support it. We'll see if anything changes in practice. I am still
not sure if I should ask for the removal branch to be added to linux-next.
Frankly I thought I might jump the gun here more than with h8300.

Either case, what to ultimately do with those two architectures will be
up to the community to decide.

Guenter