[U-Boot] U-Boot PXA support

[Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>]

On 5/21/19 3:47 PM, 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).

We need more people to implement and review those patches :)

> 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.

See above

-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut