From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2018 23:25:12 +0800 From: SZ Lin =?utf-8?B?KOael+S4iuaZuik=?= To: Linus Walleij ;, Mark Brown ;, Holsety Chen ;, Harry YJ Jhou ;, Jimmy Chen Message-ID: <20180927152512.GA3531@localhost> References: <20180911105233.GA8018@sirena.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Cc: , Ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org, Lukasz Majewski , Jonas Jensen , Alexander Sverdlin Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Deprecation / Removal of old hardware support List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi, > Found some moxa.com mail addresses in the kernel log, so including them. You can speak > about the status of the MOXA ART deployments if you like, I am talking about Sorry for the late reply and thanks for pinging me. Please note that the opinions are my own and not the views of my employer. > On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 12:52 PM Mark Brown wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 10:37:36AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > > > > > Sometimes I get the feeling that people focused on desktops or > > > servers suffer from velocitate (speed blindness) and think everybody > > > is like them. (Well don't we all.) > > > > Conversely, the approaches that keep stable kernels going also get > > applied to designing hardware that people intend to be stable - if it > > works well enough now why try something new, especially where that new > > stuff is most likely going to be more expensive to either buy or work > > with? > > Exactly. I think this is what happened at MOXA with the ART SoC. > > It seems that MOXA made that with a bunch of consultants from Faraday in Taiwan > supplying their IP blocks and know-how. Since then they have had zero incentive to > upgrade the SoC to a newer version, as this SoC handles the ethernet, GPIO and serial > lines they need just fine. Indeed. > > They recently made a new design using Freescale (now NXP) LS1021a dualcore A7, but I > can see that the ART (ARMv4) in > EM-1240 and their EP93xx products (ARMv4T) are still in active deployment and even > recommended for new projects, samples can be easily obtained.[1] Both of them work well with variety of vertical markets, it depends on application needs. For example, Moxart is not suitable for performance-related applications which are using gigabit Ethernet and so on. > > And this is good stuff, it's rock solid at this point. I just wish and hope that they really > invest in using the very latest kernels also for these elder boards even though I rarely hear > from them on the mailing lists. To have long-term maintenance kernel is very important for industrial application, that is why Moxa joined CIP [1]. [1] https://www.cip-project.org/announcement/2018/01/18/industry-leader-moxa-joins-civil-infrastructure-platform-project > > At companies that have their internal ASIC design teams I sometimes get the feeling that > these are churning out newer and more powerful ASICs as a therapeutic exercise just to > keep their skills up. But I hope it is pure prejudice on my part. It's not true for Moxa, Moxa added some specific Industrial-related IP into Moxart. SZ > > Yours, > Linus Walleij > > [1] https://www.moxa.com/product/compact_fanless_computers.htm