[Ksummit-discuss] [TECH TOPIC] ARM legacy board DT conversion finalization

Olof Johansson olof at lixom.net
Thu May 15 20:30:10 PDT 2014


On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 12:42 PM, Jason Cooper <jason at lakedaemon.net> wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 01:50:02PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 7:15 AM, Grant Likely <grant.likely at secretlab.ca> wrote:
>> > On Sun, 11 May 2014 08:37:29 -0400, Jonathan Corbet <corbet at lwn.net> wrote:
>> >> On Sat, 10 May 2014 23:00:09 -0400
>> >> Jason Cooper <jason at lakedaemon.net> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > So, I'm proposing a session where each sub-arch gives a brief run-down
>> >> > of the status of the legacy board conversion, and wraps up with a todo
>> >> > list.  After all of the sub-arches have given their status (5 - 10
>> >> > minutes each?), we hash out helping each other with the final pieces.
>> >>
>> >> This *really* looks like an ARM minisummit topic to me; hopefully one
>> >> of those is in the works?
>> >
>> > It does, doesn't it? I wouldn't want this as a main ksummit topic.
>> >
>> > The problem with ARM minisummits these days is it is very easy to
>> > devolve into a nothing-but-dt meeting with a bunch of people sitting
>> > around looking either annoyed or bored. We weren't able to pull enough
>> > topics together when we tried to do an ARM minisummit at the ELC.
>> >
>> > Instead of a traditional ARM minisummit, perhaps we should do an ARM
>> > platforms minisprint instead. Light on any kind of presentations, but
>> > have the right people in the room to try and knock out some of the
>> > legacy backlog (which is kind of what Jason described)
>> Isn't a large part of the backlog cases of we need DT bindings for X?
>> There are cases like moving platforms to common clk, but is there
>> anything to discuss for those? Most of those cases need bodies to work
>> on them. It seems like the rest of the todo lists could become an all
>> DT discussion. I'm not saying it shouldn't happen, just pointing out
>> where I think sprint discussions will go.
> As gregkh mentioned for the staging tree:
> $ ls arch/arm/*/TODO
> would be helpful for folks who aren't familiar with an SoC, but can
> easily generate patches.  imho, this is work for *after* the proposed
> discussion.  We don't currently have a good idea which directories to
> deprecate, convert, or leave to bit rot.  Once we do, I think the TODO
> list would be helpful.

Anyone should feel free to add a TODO file and list in their machine
directory at any given time. I don't think there's need for discussion
before that happens. There's also the elinux.org wikis if you want to
keep it out of the kernel -- keeping the TODO around for old kernel
versions might not be very useful so having it out of tree might be
just as fine.

> My main reason for raising this topic was the proximity to LinuxCon.
> There's a better chance of getting some distro representation to give us
> valuable feedback: "This SoC is quiet, no patches, but is actively used"
> and "We thought the kernel guys had a reason for keeping that one."

Funny, I would have thought ELC to have been a much more suitable
venue for that, especially since the older ARM platforms tend to be
embedded, and not generic compute ones. :)

> eg: I know ixp4xx had an active community around it at one time for the
> NSLU2, and the Gateworks boards used that SoC.  Are there people still
> running it?  Well, my Dad is, but I can fix that if needed. ;-)

I suspect it'll be hard to get that answered at LinuxCon, nor at an
ARM maintainer summit since the fringe platforms tend to not be
represented there either.


More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list