From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Hellstrom Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2015 13:17:35 +0100 Subject: [U-Boot] Remove sparc archiecture? In-Reply-To: <444fa87bd0f644b0a6027f7bb5a5f34a@SPASTBMXS01.sunspace.co.za> References: <20151018122425.GX23893@bill-the-cat> <56240F70.8020701@gaisler.com> <444fa87bd0f644b0a6027f7bb5a5f34a@SPASTBMXS01.sunspace.co.za> Message-ID: <563B48DF.6010607@gaisler.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 10/19/2015 04:54 PM, Francois Retief wrote: > Hallo Daniel, > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Daniel Hellstrom [mailto:daniel at gaisler.com] >> Sent: 18 October 2015 11:30 PM >> To: Masahiro Yamada >> Subject: Re: [U-Boot] Remove sparc archiecture? >> >> On 10/18/2015 05:20 PM, Masahiro Yamada wrote: >>> (+CC Francois) >>> >>> >>> 2015-10-18 21:24 GMT+09:00 Tom Rini: >>>> On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 06:19:16AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> It looks like sparc has no maintainer and has not been converted to >>>>> generic board. Should we remove it? >>>> Well, not quite "no maintainer", but... Daniel? SPARC is in need of >>>> some work (and possibly a new toolchain too, I stopped building it all >>>> the time due to a false positive warning the 3.4.4 toolchain I have >>>> gives). Thanks! >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Tom >>> I see generic board work for SPARC >>> >>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/404616/ >>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/404618/ >>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/404617/ >>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/404619/ >>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/404620/ >>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/404622/ >>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/404621/ >>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/404624/ >>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/404623/ >>> >>> but, Daniel was not responding... >>> >>> >>> Perhaps, replace the maintainer if Francois agrees? >> I regret to say that I've been too busy last two years and I don't see a >> change during 2015 either. >> >> I would not like to see the SPARC port removed now that the LEON >> community grows as new LEON3 and LEON4 chips comes to market. WIth >> multi-core and higher frequency there is a growing interest in u-boot >> from the LEON community. >> >> Nowadays there are LEON GCC targets mcpu=leon,leon3,leon3v7 so it should >> be possible to setup a working toolchain based on GCC-4.9 which we use >> for Linux and RTEMS. In the past I've used a GCC-4.4 toolchain from >> Cobham Gaisler. >> >> If Francois agrees it is probably a good idea to let him take over the >> SPARC as he has put work into both BSP and architecture. Although I >> would like to acknowledge my interest in u-boot and I hope and believe >> that my efforts will be resumed in the future. Francois, if you feel it >> is too much a temporary replacement could also be an option if the >> u-boot project allows it. > Yes, I am willing to take over as maintainer until such time that Daniel is ready > to resume his effort in future. We are investing in the LEON as archtecture and > would like to see U-Boot support for SPARC continuing into the future. Thanks! > Daniel, I would just like to ask if you could stay on as an advisor, if at all possible. > I have only access to one LEON3FT board at the moment and may require advice > on other devices as time goes by. I will try to keep questions consise and as > infrequent as possible for you. I'm on parental leave until January, but I'll do my best. Regards, Daniel > Will rebase my patch set to the latest release this week and resend them for review. > Masahiro, what version of GCC is prefered (if any) for the next release of U-Boot. > I am currently using the GCC-4.4 toolchain from Cobham Gaisler. > > Regards, > Francois > > > ________________________________ > Disclaimer and confidentiality note ? refer to our website for further details: www.spaceteq.co.za