maintainership update for the Marvell Orion family of SOCs
PATCH 1/1 maintainership update for the Marvell Orion family of SOCs
While Lennert and I have moved our focus to other things, some people picked up the slack on those platforms. Let's empower them with a more official status.
MAINTAINERS +5 -4
@@ -908,11 +908,12 @@ ARM/MAGICIAN MACHINE SUPPORT M: Philipp Zabel <[email protected]> S: Maintained -ARM/Marvell Loki/Kirkwood/MV78xx0/Orion SOC support -M: Lennert Buytenhek <[email protected]> -M: Nicolas Pitre <[email protected]> +ARM/Marvell Dove/Kirkwood/MV78xx0/Orion SOC support +M: Jason Cooper <[email protected]> +M: Andrew Lunn <[email protected]> L: linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org (moderated for non-subscribers) -S: Odd Fixes +S: Maintained +F: arch/arm/mach-dove/ F: arch/arm/mach-kirkwood/ F: arch/arm/mach-mv78xx0/ F: arch/arm/mach-orion5x/
PATCH 1/1 maintainership update for the Marvell Orion family of SOCs
Quoted 8 lines · Nicolas Pitre
While Lennert and I have moved our focus to other things, some people picked up the slack on those platforms. Let's empower them with a more official status.
Signed-off-by Nicolas Pitre <[email protected]>Cc Lennert Buytenhek <[email protected]>Cc Jason Cooper <[email protected]>Cc Andrew Lunn <[email protected]>
Quoted 22 lines
MAINTAINERS +5
-4@@ -908,11 +908,12 @@ ARM/MAGICIAN MACHINE SUPPORT M: Philipp Zabel <[email protected]> S: Maintained -ARM/Marvell Loki/Kirkwood/MV78xx0/Orion SOC support -M: Lennert Buytenhek <[email protected]> -M: Nicolas Pitre <[email protected]> +ARM/Marvell Dove/Kirkwood/MV78xx0/Orion SOC support +M: Jason Cooper <[email protected]> +M: Andrew Lunn <[email protected]> L: linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org (moderated for non-subscribers) -S: Odd Fixes +S: Maintained +F: arch/arm/mach-dove/ F: arch/arm/mach-kirkwood/ F: arch/arm/mach-mv78xx0/ F: arch/arm/mach-orion5x/
PATCH 1/1 maintainership update for the Marvell Orion family of SOCs
Quoted 6 lines · Jason Cooper
Quoted 4 lines · Nicolas Pitre
While Lennert and I have moved our focus to other things, some people picked up the slack on those platforms. Let's empower them with a more official status.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Signed-off-by Nicolas Pitre <[email protected]>Cc Lennert Buytenhek <[email protected]>Cc Jason Cooper <[email protected]>Cc Andrew Lunn <[email protected]>Acked-by Jason Cooper <[email protected]>
PATCH 1/1 maintainership update for the Marvell Orion family of SOCs
Quoted 7 lines · Arnd Bergmann
Quoted 6 lines · Jason Cooper
Quoted 4 lines · Nicolas Pitre
While Lennert and I have moved our focus to other things, some people picked up the slack on those platforms. Let's empower them with a more official status.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Signed-off-by Nicolas Pitre <[email protected]>Cc Lennert Buytenhek <[email protected]>Cc Jason Cooper <[email protected]>Cc Andrew Lunn <[email protected]>Acked-by Jason Cooper <[email protected]>Acked-by Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]>
PATCH 1/1 maintainership update for the Marvell Orion family of SOCs
In reply to Nicolas PitreHi,
Quoted 20 lines · Nicolas Pitre
While Lennert and I have moved our focus to other things, some people picked up the slack on those platforms. Let's empower them with a more official status.
Signed-off-by Nicolas Pitre <[email protected]>Cc Lennert Buytenhek <[email protected]>Cc Jason Cooper <[email protected]>Cc Andrew Lunn <[email protected]>MAINTAINERS +0
-3@@ -908,11 +908,12 @@ ARM/MAGICIAN MACHINE SUPPORT M: Philipp Zabel <[email protected]> S: Maintained -ARM/Marvell Loki/Kirkwood/MV78xx0/Orion SOC support -M: Lennert Buytenhek <[email protected]> -M: Nicolas Pitre <[email protected]>
MAINTAINERS ARM/MAGICIAN MACHINE SUPPORT · line 919
Quoted 10 lines
MAINTAINERS +5
-1+ARM/Marvell Dove/Kirkwood/MV78xx0/Orion SOC support +M: Jason Cooper <[email protected]> +M: Andrew Lunn <[email protected]> L: linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org (moderated for non-subscribers) -S: Odd Fixes +S: Maintained +F: arch/arm/mach-dove/ F: arch/arm/mach-kirkwood/ F: arch/arm/mach-mv78xx0/ F: arch/arm/mach-orion5x/
Sorry to hijack a little bit this thread, but I got a few days ago a 88ap510/dove device so I was wondering if the work currently done on kirkwood would allow us the same kernel binary at least on dove and kirkwood ? [1] If so, when it'll be possible, will it be considered to move the corresponding board setup from arch/arm/mach-{dove,kirkwood,...} into a new directory, like what was done on recently on imx ?
Thanks,
Arnaud
[1] I'm only talking of kirkwood and dove because it's only what I can test. Of course, if it can be a single kernel binary for dove/kirkwood/mv78xx0/orion5x, it'll be even better.
PATCH 1/1 maintainership update for the Marvell Orion family of SOCs
Quoted 11 lines · Arnaud Patard
Sorry to hijack a little bit this thread, but I got a few days ago a 88ap510/dove device so I was wondering if the work currently done on kirkwood would allow us the same kernel binary at least on dove and kirkwood ? [1] If so, when it'll be possible, will it be considered to move the corresponding board setup from
arch/arm/mach-{dove,kirkwood,...}into a new directory, like what was done on recently on imx ?[1] I'm only talking of kirkwood and dove because it's only what I can test. Of course, if it can be a single kernel binary for dove/kirkwood/mv78xx0/orion5x, it'll be even better.
While I don't know of anyone working on this currently, I've also thought about it being doable, but I would defer it until we can probe all the devices using the device tree, because at that point it will get much simpler. We might just move all the DT based board support into the plat-orion directory and leave the other directories for the classic probing, eventually to be removed when the new stuff can handle all the machines that someone cares about.
Note that dove is fundamentally incompatible with the others at runtime, being ARMv7 based instead of ARMv5, but it could still live in the same directory, like we do for other platforms.
Arnd
PATCH 1/1 maintainership update for the Marvell Orion family of SOCs
Quoted 9 lines · Arnd Bergmann
Quoted 8 lines · Arnaud Patard
Sorry to hijack a little bit this thread, but I got a few days ago a 88ap510/dove device so I was wondering if the work currently done on kirkwood would allow us the same kernel binary at least on dove and kirkwood ? [1] If so, when it'll be possible, will it be considered to move the corresponding board setup from
arch/arm/mach-{dove,kirkwood,...}into a new directory, like what was done on recently on imx ?
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 3 lines
[1] I'm only talking of kirkwood and dove because it's only what I can test. Of course, if it can be a single kernel binary for dove/kirkwood/mv78xx0/orion5x, it'll be even better.
While I don't know of anyone working on this currently, I've also thought about it being doable, but I would defer it until we can probe all the devices using the device tree, because at that point it will get much simpler. We might just move all the DT based board support into
ok.
Quoted 3 lines
the plat-orion directory and leave the other directories for the classic probing, eventually to be removed when the new stuff can handle all the machines that someone cares about.
I'm not sure we'll be able to remove any machine without being sure it's working and it can take quite some time. orion/kirkwood/... are used on NAS boxes so I guess people are not necessary updating their kernel on a regular basis.
Quoted 4 lines
Note that dove is fundamentally incompatible with the others at runtime, being ARMv7 based instead of ARMv5, but it could still live in the same directory, like we do for other platforms.
oh, right. I guess I need some sleep.
Arnaud
PATCH 1/1 maintainership update for the Marvell Orion family of SOCs
Quoted 8 lines · Arnaud Patard
Quoted 3 lines
the plat-orion directory and leave the other directories for the classic probing, eventually to be removed when the new stuff can handle all the machines that someone cares about.
I'm not sure we'll be able to remove any machine without being sure it's working and it can take quite some time. orion/kirkwood/... are used on NAS boxes so I guess people are not necessary updating their kernel on a regular basis.
Well, there is no reason to rush this at all, it could live in parallel for a couple of years. But at one point we can decide that if nobody has bothered to write the .dts file for one board and tested it that nobody cares about that board any more and it can just get removed and possibly added back in dts form when someone does complain.
Arnd
PATCH 1/1 maintainership update for the Marvell Orion family of SOCs
Quoted 5 lines
Well, there is no reason to rush this at all, it could live in parallel for a couple of years. But at one point we can decide that if nobody has bothered to write the .dts file for one board and tested it that nobody cares about that board any more and it can just get removed and possibly added back in dts form when someone does complain.
Probably a FAQ, but maybe somebody can point me in the right direction. How will Debian, Ubuntu, etc, deal with old machines who's u-boot does not support DT, yet the kernel has moved on and only has DT support for a board? Will the kernel install process need to determine what board the machine is and append the DT to the end of the kernel? Or do we envisage a process where all DT are appended to the kernel, and the machine ID, as passed by the old uboot, is used to pick the correct DT?
Thanks
Andrew
PATCH 1/1 maintainership update for the Marvell Orion family of SOCs
Quoted 6 lines · Andrew Lunn
Quoted 5 lines
Well, there is no reason to rush this at all, it could live in parallel for a couple of years. But at one point we can decide that if nobody has bothered to write the .dts file for one board and tested it that nobody cares about that board any more and it can just get removed and possibly added back in dts form when someone does complain.
Quoted 6 lines
Probably a FAQ, but maybe somebody can point me in the right direction. How will Debian, Ubuntu, etc, deal with old machines who's u-boot does not support DT, yet the kernel has moved on and only has DT support for a board? Will the kernel install process need to determine what board the machine is and append the DT to the end of the kernel?
I think that is the most likely scenario. Another option would be to provide a replacement or second-stage boot loader that actually understands DT and that gets loaded instead of the kernel by the first-stage boot loader.
Quoted 3 lines
Or do we envisage a process where all DT are appended to the kernel, and the machine ID, as passed by the old uboot, is used to pick the correct DT?
This has been discussed in the past, but IIRC we decided against putting that logic into the kernel. Folks on devicetree-discuss at l.o.o might remember the details better than me.
Arnd
PATCH 1/1 maintainership update for the Marvell Orion family of SOCs
In reply to Nicolas PitreQuoted 8 lines · Nicolas Pitre
While Lennert and I have moved our focus to other things, some people picked up the slack on those platforms. Let's empower them with a more official status.
Signed-off-by Nicolas Pitre <[email protected]>Cc Lennert Buytenhek <[email protected]>Cc Jason Cooper <[email protected]>Cc Andrew Lunn <[email protected]>
I've applied the patch with the Acks to the next/maintainers branch of arm-soc now. Thanks everyone!
Arnd