[U-Boot] U-Boot PXA support

[Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>]

On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 04:47:44PM +0300, Alex Sadovsky wrote:
> On 21/05/2019, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote:
> > On 5/21/19 11:50 AM, Alex Sadovsky wrote:
> >> It's slightly off-topic but I wonder whether this ongoing deprecation
> >> of ARMv4 and ARMv5 (first in GCC, then in U-Boot) really simplifies
> >> anything at all.
> >> There are tons of devices that are still working good and there are
> >> even ARMv5-based MCUs that are still produced (such as CH561
> >> manufactured by WCH).
> >>
> >> IMHO it makes sense to drop only the XScale-specific tuning first and
> >> to treat PXA (and similar CPUs) as a more generic armv5te. I wonder
> >> what to do when GCC drops ARMv5 completely...
> >
> > Do you want to step up and help maintain these platforms ?
> > The real problem is maintainer overload and that's what this solves, it
> > reduces the workload on maintainers. The legacy code needs to be updated
> > and retested, and it seems there's just no interest in that. If there is
> > someone who's willing to stick around for some time and take care of
> > those platforms, great.
> Of course I understand the maintainers' load. If PXA support (or
> anything other that I'm using) is an obstacle in its current form and
> should be fixed (e.g. ported to newer APIs), I have interest in
> providing patches to fix it. You can always Cc: me in case of
> ARMv5/PXA-related questions, although I can test only the hardware
> that I have (probably this comment was too obvious).
> 
> My point was about pro-active removal (i.e. removal of the code that
> isn't a definite obstacle yet) and about judging about the code
> usefulness only by the age of last changes (there are somehow stable
> things after all).
> 
> Of course I'm not against the removal of such things that are broken
> && nobody fixes them for some time.

Just for the record, we don't (unless the maintainer agrees, ie zipitz2
removal) proactively drop code.  But we do try and put out warnings
about things not being updated to new APIs in time.

PXA in particular, Marek is listed as the maintainer and has asked if
someone would like it instead.  So I'd really appreciate it if someone
with continued interest in PXA says they'll take it over.  That mainly
means fixing (by migration) the various drivers that don't use DM yet,
to use DM and for the "PXA" symbols in scripts/config_whitelist.txt
migrating them to Kconfig.  Dropping boards that no one has interest in
and even replacing them with boards people have and have interest in, is
great.  And I'd be totally happy with someone wanting to maintain PXA
support until the end of time ;)

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20190521/13a2fe9f/attachment.sig>