From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 916EF6FC for ; Fri, 16 May 2014 03:30:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qc0-f171.google.com (mail-qc0-f171.google.com [209.85.216.171]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 587AA20212 for ; Fri, 16 May 2014 03:30:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qc0-f171.google.com with SMTP id x13so3433320qcv.30 for ; Thu, 15 May 2014 20:30:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20140515194215.GR27822@titan.lakedaemon.net> References: <20140511030009.GO12708@titan.lakedaemon.net> <20140511083729.211e9b5f@lwn.net> <20140515121546.3A06AC40B0E@trevor.secretlab.ca> <20140515194215.GR27822@titan.lakedaemon.net> Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 20:30:10 -0700 Message-ID: From: Olof Johansson To: Jason Cooper Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: Rob Herring , Linux ARM Kernel , "ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [TECH TOPIC] ARM legacy board DT conversion finalization List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi, On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 12:42 PM, Jason Cooper 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 wrote: >> > On Sun, 11 May 2014 08:37:29 -0400, Jonathan Corbet wrote: >> >> On Sat, 10 May 2014 23:00:09 -0400 >> >> Jason Cooper 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. -Olof