ARM: Removing ARCH_S5PC100
Subsystems (9)
cover ARM: Removing ARCH_S5PC100
This patch remvoes mach-s5pc100 directory for ARCH_S5PC100 in arch/arm.
If any problems, please let me know immediately.
[PATCH 1/7] ARM: S5PC100: Removing ARCH_S5PC100
[PATCH 2/7] ASoC: Remove to support sound for S5PC100 [PATCH 3/7] [media] s5p-fimc: Remove to support fimc for S5PC100 [PATCH 4/7] mtd: OneNAND: Remove to support onenand for S5PC100 [PATCH 5/7] tty: Remove to support serial for S5PC100 [PATCH 6/7] video: s3c-fb: Remove to support fb for S5PC100 [PATCH 7/7] libata: Remove to support pata for S5PC100
PATCH 2/7 ASoC: Remove to support sound for S5PC100
According to removing ARCH_S5PC100, we don't need to support sound for S5PC100.
--- sound/soc/samsung/Kconfig | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
sound/soc/samsung/Kconfig +1 -1
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ config SND_SOC_SAMSUNG tristate "ASoC support for Samsung" - depends on ARCH_S3C2410 || ARCH_S3C64XX || ARCH_S5PC100 || ARCH_S5PV210 || ARCH_S5P64X0 || ARCH_S5P6442 || ARCH_EXYNOS4 + depends on ARCH_S3C2410 || ARCH_S3C64XX || ARCH_S5PV210 || ARCH_S5P64X0 || ARCH_S5P6442 || ARCH_EXYNOS4 select S3C64XX_DMA if ARCH_S3C64XX select S3C2410_DMA if ARCH_S3C2410 help
Signature · 1 line
1.7.1
PATCH 2/7 ASoC: Remove to support sound for S5PC100
Quoted 8 lines · Kukjin Kim
According to removing
ARCH_S5PC100, we don't need to support sound for S5PC100.Cc Jassi Brar <[email protected]>Cc Mark Brown <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Kukjin Kim <[email protected]>---
?sound/soc/samsung/Kconfig | ? ?2 +-
You might also want to remove smdkc100 support from
sound/soc/samsung/smdk_wm9713.c sound/soc/samsung/smdk_wm8580.c
And three other references to smdkc100 in sound/soc/samsung/Kconfig
PATCH 2/7 ASoC: Remove to support sound for S5PC100
Quoted 11 lines · Jassi Brar
Quoted 8 lines · Kukjin Kim
According to removing
ARCH_S5PC100, we don't need to support sound for S5PC100.Cc Jassi Brar <[email protected]>Cc Mark Brown <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Kukjin Kim <[email protected]>--- sound/soc/samsung/Kconfig | 2 +-
Hi Jassi,
Oops...Yeah, you're right.
Thanks for your pointing out :)
Will update soon.
Quoted 4 lines
You might also want to remove smdkc100 support from
sound/soc/samsung/smdk_wm9713.csound/soc/samsung/smdk_wm8580.c
And three other references to smdkc100 insound/soc/samsung/Kconfig
I found something for smdkc100 in smdk_wm8580.c but I'm not sure which should be removed in smdk_wm9713.c.
Thanks.
Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <[email protected]>, Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
PATCH 2/7 ASoC: Remove to support sound for S5PC100
Quoted 7 lines · Kukjin Kim
Quoted 4 lines
You might also want to remove smdkc100 support from ?sound/soc/samsung/smdk_wm9713.c ?sound/soc/samsung/smdk_wm8580.c
And three other references to smdkc100 insound/soc/samsung/KconfigI found something for smdkc100 in
smdk_wm8580.cbut I'm not sure which should be removed insmdk_wm9713.c.
Just the comment about jumper settings on smdkc100 otherwise it gives wrong impression that the board is supported.
PATCH 2/7 ASoC: Remove to support sound for S5PC100
Quoted 8 lines · Jassi Brar
Quoted 5 lines · Kukjin Kim
Quoted 4 lines
You might also want to remove smdkc100 support from
sound/soc/samsung/smdk_wm9713.csound/soc/samsung/smdk_wm8580.c
And three other references to smdkc100 insound/soc/samsung/Kconfig
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 1 line
I found something for smdkc100 in
smdk_wm8580.cbut I'm not sure whichshould be removed in
smdk_wm9713.c.Quoted 1 line
Just the comment about jumper settings on smdkc100 otherwise it gives wrong impression that the board is supported.
Ok, I agree.
But I'm not sure what is required for it.
Could you please let me know about it after discussion of removing C100?
Thanks.
Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <[email protected]>, Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
PATCH 2/7 ASoC: Remove to support sound for S5PC100
Quoted 11 lines · Kukjin Kim
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 1 line
I found something for smdkc100 in
smdk_wm8580.cbut I'm not sure whichshould be removed in
smdk_wm9713.c.Quoted 1 line
Just the comment about jumper settings on smdkc100 otherwise it gives wrong impression that the board is supported.
Ok, I agree.
But I'm not sure what is required for it.
Could you please let me know about it after discussion of removing C100?
Simply doing this ....
sound/soc/samsung/smdk_wm9713.c +0 -1
@@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ static struct snd_soc_card smdk;* Default CFG switch settings to use this driver: * * SMDK6410: Set CFG1 1-3 On, CFG2 1-4 Off -* SMDKC100: Set CFG6 1-3 On, CFG7 1 On * SMDKC110: Set CFGB10 1-2 Off, CFGB12 1-3 On * SMDKV210: Set CFGB10 1-2 Off, CFGB12 1-3 On * SMDKV310: Set CFG2 1-2 Off, CFG4 All On, CFG7 All Off, CFG8 1-On
Thanks.
PATCH 3/7 s5p-fimc: Remove to support fimc for S5PC100
In reply to Kukjin KimAccording to removing ARCH_S5PC100, we don't need to support fimc for S5PC100.
--- drivers/media/video/s5p-fimc/fimc-core.c | 14 -------------- 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
drivers/media/video/s5p-fimc/fimc-core.c +0 -14
@@ -1871,17 +1871,6 @@ static struct samsung_fimc_variant fimc2_variant_exynos4 = { .pix_limit = &s5p_pix_limit[3], }; -/* S5PC100 */ -static struct samsung_fimc_driverdata fimc_drvdata_s5p = { - .variant = { - [0 ] = &fimc0_variant_s5p, - [1 ] = &fimc0_variant_s5p, - [2 ] = &fimc2_variant_s5p, - }, - .num_entities =3 , - .lclk_frequency =133000000UL , -}; -/* S5PV210, S5PC110 */ static struct samsung_fimc_driverdata fimc_drvdata_s5pv210 = { .variant = {
@@ -1907,9 +1896,6 @@ static struct samsung_fimc_driverdata fimc_drvdata_exynos4 = {static struct platform_device_id fimc_driver_ids[] = { { - .name ="s5p-fimc" , - .driver_data = (unsigned long )&fimc_drvdata_s5p, - }, { .name ="s5pv210-fimc" , .driver_data = (unsigned long )&fimc_drvdata_s5pv210, }, {
Signature · 1 line
1.7.1
Sylwester Nawrocki
maintainerPATCH 3/7 s5p-fimc: Remove to support fimc for S5PC100
Hi Kukjin,
Shouldn't there be some deprecation period for whole s5pc100 support removal ? It looks a bit rude to me that suddenly whole support for the SoC is vanished. I know at least one active user of mainline FIMC driver @ s5pc100.
Quoted 43 lines · Kukjin Kim
According to removing
ARCH_S5PC100, we don't need to support fimc for S5PC100.Cc Sylwester Nawrocki <[email protected]>Cc Kyungmin Park <[email protected]>Cc Mauro Carvalho Chehab <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Kukjin Kim <[email protected]>--- drivers/media/video/s5p-fimc/fimc-core.c | 14 -------------- 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)drivers/media/video/s5p-fimc/fimc-core.c +0
-14@@ -1871,17 +1871,6 @@ static struct samsung_fimc_variant fimc2_variant_exynos4 = { .pix_limit = &s5p_pix_limit[3], }; -/* S5PC100 */ -static struct samsung_fimc_driverdata fimc_drvdata_s5p = { - .variant = { - [0 ] = &fimc0_variant_s5p, - [1 ] = &fimc0_variant_s5p, - [2 ] = &fimc2_variant_s5p, - }, - .num_entities =3 , - .lclk_frequency =133000000UL , -}; -/* S5PV210, S5PC110 */ static struct samsung_fimc_driverdata fimc_drvdata_s5pv210 = { .variant = {@@ -1907,9 +1896,6 @@ static struct samsung_fimc_driverdata fimc_drvdata_exynos4 = {static struct platform_device_id fimc_driver_ids[] = { { - .name ="s5p-fimc" , - .driver_data = (unsigned long )&fimc_drvdata_s5p, - }, { .name ="s5pv210-fimc" , .driver_data = (unsigned long )&fimc_drvdata_s5pv210, }, {
Signature · 2 lines
Sylwester Nawrocki Samsung Poland R&D Center
PATCH 3/7 s5p-fimc: Remove to support fimc for S5PC100
Quoted 3 lines · Sylwester Nawrocki
Hi Kukjin,
Hi,
Quoted 1 line
Shouldn't there be some deprecation period for whole s5pc100 support
removal ?
This is that. But I know, there is no time...
Quoted 1 line
It looks a bit rude to me that suddenly whole support for the SoC is
vanished.
Hmm...what did you think about my previous comments: 'removing some "mach-s5pxxxx"s'?
Quoted 1 line
I know at least one active user of mainline FIMC driver @ s5pc100.
Do you _really_ want to keep it in later mainline?
I was not sure we should keep continually 6442 and C100 in mainline when I decided to removing 'mach-s5pxxxx'.
Thanks.
Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <[email protected]>, Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
Sylwester Nawrocki
maintainerPATCH 3/7 s5p-fimc: Remove to support fimc for S5PC100
Quoted 5 lines · Kukjin Kim
Quoted 1 line · Sylwester Nawrocki
Shouldn't there be some deprecation period for whole s5pc100 support
removal ?
Quoted 7 lines
This is that. But I know, there is no time...
Quoted 1 line
It looks a bit rude to me that suddenly whole support for the SoC is
vanished.
Hmm...what did you think about my previous comments: 'removing some "mach-s5pxxxx"s'?
I would expect one kernel release period of so notice for such a change. But it doesn't have to be true in this specific case.
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines
I know at least one active user of mainline FIMC driver @ s5pc100.
Do you _really_ want to keep it in later mainline?
I don't personally have interest in maintaining this driver for s5pc100. It just adds unnecessary complexity to my work and in fact I have limited possibilities now to test the driver on s5pc100.
But if there are users and it really doesn't cost much to keep the support for s5pc100 why bother to remove it? Just to get rid of one mach-* directory ?
Quoted 3 lines
I was not sure we should keep continually 6442 and C100 in mainline when I decided to removing 'mach-s5pxxxx'.
I really don't care about 6442, but what's the problem with s5pc100 ? Is it being discontinued ? Or there is little users of it ?
I would much more like to see attempts to consolidate the code rather than simply removing it.
Regards,
Signature · 2 lines
Sylwester Nawrocki Samsung Poland R&D Center
PATCH 3/7 s5p-fimc: Remove to support fimc for S5PC100
Quoted 21 lines · Sylwester Nawrocki
Quoted 5 lines · Kukjin Kim
Quoted 1 line · Sylwester Nawrocki
Shouldn't there be some deprecation period for whole s5pc100 support
removal ?
Quoted 7 lines
This is that. But I know, there is no time...
Quoted 1 line
It looks a bit rude to me that suddenly whole support for the SoC is
vanished.
Hmm...what did you think about my previous comments: 'removing some "mach-s5pxxxx"s'?
I would expect one kernel release period of so notice for such a change. But it doesn't have to be true in this specific case.
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 2 lines
I know at least one active user of mainline FIMC driver @ s5pc100.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 1 line
Do you _really_ want to keep it in later mainline?
I don't personally have interest in maintaining this driver for s5pc100. It just adds unnecessary complexity to my work and in fact I have limited possibilities now to test the driver on s5pc100.
But if there are users and it really doesn't cost much to keep the support for s5pc100 why bother to remove it? Just to get rid of one mach-*
directory ?
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 3 lines
I was not sure we should keep continually 6442 and C100 in mainline when
I
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 1 line
decided to removing 'mach-s5pxxxx'.
I really don't care about 6442, but what's the problem with s5pc100 ? Is it being discontinued ? Or there is little users of it ?
I would much more like to see attempts to consolidate the code rather than simply removing it.
Hi Sylwester,
Thanks for your opinion :)
Please refer to my reply on this thread.
Thanks.
Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <[email protected]>, Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
PATCH 3/7 s5p-fimc: Remove to support fimc for S5PC100
In reply to Kukjin KimEm 11-05-2011 22:11, Kukjin Kim escreveu:
Quoted 2 lines
According to removing
ARCH_S5PC100, we don't need to support fimc for S5PC100.
NACK
There's nothing mentioning the removal of ARCH_S5PC100 or the corresponding bits at feature-removal-schedule.txt:
$ grep -i s5pc100 Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt $
Mauro.
Quoted 41 lines
Cc Sylwester Nawrocki <[email protected]>Cc Kyungmin Park <[email protected]>Cc Mauro Carvalho Chehab <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Kukjin Kim <[email protected]>--- drivers/media/video/s5p-fimc/fimc-core.c | 14 -------------- 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)drivers/media/video/s5p-fimc/fimc-core.c +0
-14@@ -1871,17 +1871,6 @@ static struct samsung_fimc_variant fimc2_variant_exynos4 = { .pix_limit = &s5p_pix_limit[3], }; -/* S5PC100 */ -static struct samsung_fimc_driverdata fimc_drvdata_s5p = { - .variant = { - [0 ] = &fimc0_variant_s5p, - [1 ] = &fimc0_variant_s5p, - [2 ] = &fimc2_variant_s5p, - }, - .num_entities =3 , - .lclk_frequency =133000000UL , -}; -/* S5PV210, S5PC110 */ static struct samsung_fimc_driverdata fimc_drvdata_s5pv210 = { .variant = {@@ -1907,9 +1896,6 @@ static struct samsung_fimc_driverdata fimc_drvdata_exynos4 = {static struct platform_device_id fimc_driver_ids[] = { { - .name ="s5p-fimc" , - .driver_data = (unsigned long )&fimc_drvdata_s5p, - }, { .name ="s5pv210-fimc" , .driver_data = (unsigned long )&fimc_drvdata_s5pv210, }, {
PATCH 4/7 mtd: OneNAND: Remove to support onenand for S5PC100
In reply to Kukjin KimAccording to removing ARCH_S5PC100, we don't need to support onenand for S5PC100.
--- drivers/mtd/onenand/Kconfig | 4 ++-- drivers/mtd/onenand/samsung.c | 25 +------------------------ 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
drivers/mtd/onenand/Kconfig +2 -2
@@ -32,10 +32,10 @@ config MTD_ONENAND_OMAP2 config MTD_ONENAND_SAMSUNG tristate "OneNAND on Samsung SOC controller support" - depends on ARCH_S3C64XX || ARCH_S5PC100 || ARCH_S5PV210 || ARCH_EXYNOS4 + depends on ARCH_S3C64XX || ARCH_S5PV210 || ARCH_EXYNOS4 help Support for a OneNAND flash device connected to an Samsung SOC. - S3C64XX/S5PC100 use command mapping method. + S3C64XX use command mapping method. S5PC110/S5PC210 use generic OneNAND method. config MTD_ONENAND_OTP
drivers/mtd/onenand/samsung.c +1 -24
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@* published by the Free Software Foundation. * * Implementation: -* S3C64XX and S5PC100: emulate the pseudo BufferRAM +* S3C64XX: emulate the pseudo BufferRAM * S5PC110: use DMA */
@@ -32,7 +32,6 @@enum soc_type {TYPE_S3C6400 ,TYPE_S3C6410 , -TYPE_S5PC100 ,TYPE_S5PC110 , };
@@ -59,7 +58,6 @@ enum soc_type {#define MAP_11 (0x3)#define S3C64XX_CMD_MAP_SHIFT 24 -#define S5PC100_CMD_MAP_SHIFT 26#define S3C6400_FBA_SHIFT 10#define S3C6400_FPA_SHIFT 4
@@ -69,10 +67,6 @@ enum soc_type {#define S3C6410_FPA_SHIFT 6#define S3C6410_FSA_SHIFT 4 -#define S5PC100_FBA_SHIFT 13 -#define S5PC100_FPA_SHIFT 7 -#define S5PC100_FSA_SHIFT 5 -/* S5PC110 specific definitions */ #define S5PC110_DMA_SRC_ADDR 0x400#define S5PC110_DMA_SRC_CFG 0x404
@@ -202,11 +196,6 @@ static unsigned int s3c64xx_cmd_map(unsigned type, unsigned val)return (type <<S3C64XX_CMD_MAP_SHIFT ) | val; } -static unsigned int s5pc1xx_cmd_map (unsigned type,unsigned val) -{ -return (type <<S5PC100_CMD_MAP_SHIFT ) | val; -} -static unsigned int s3c6400_mem_addr (int fba,int fpa,int fsa) { return (fba << S3C6400_FBA_SHIFT) | (fpa << S3C6400_FPA_SHIFT) |
@@ -219,12 +208,6 @@ static unsigned int s3c6410_mem_addr(int fba, int fpa, int fsa) (fsa <<S3C6410_FSA_SHIFT ); } -static unsigned int s5pc100_mem_addr (int fba,int fpa,int fsa) -{ -return (fba <<S5PC100_FBA_SHIFT ) | (fpa <<S5PC100_FPA_SHIFT ) | - (fsa <<S5PC100_FSA_SHIFT ); -} -static void s3c_onenand_reset (void ) {unsigned long timeout =0x10000 ;
@@ -842,9 +825,6 @@ static void s3c_onenand_setup(struct mtd_info *mtd) }else if (onenand->type ==TYPE_S3C6410 ) { onenand->mem_addr = s3c6410_mem_addr; onenand->cmd_map = s3c64xx_cmd_map; - }else if (onenand->type ==TYPE_S5PC100 ) { - onenand->mem_addr = s5pc100_mem_addr; - onenand->cmd_map = s5pc1xx_cmd_map; }else if (onenand->type ==TYPE_S5PC110 ) {/* Use generic onenand functions */ this->read_bufferram = s5pc110_read_bufferram;
@@ -1127,9 +1107,6 @@ static struct platform_device_id s3c_onenand_driver_ids[] = { .name = "s3c6410-onenand", .driver_data = TYPE_S3C6410, }, { - .name = "s5pc100-onenand", - .driver_data = TYPE_S5PC100, - }, { .name = "s5pc110-onenand", .driver_data = TYPE_S5PC110, }, { },
Signature · 1 line
1.7.1
PATCH 5/7 tty: Remove to support serial for S5PC100
In reply to Kukjin KimAccording to removing ARCH_S5PC100, we don't need to support serial for S5PC100.
--- drivers/tty/serial/Kconfig | 8 ++++---- 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
drivers/tty/serial/Kconfig +4 -4
@@ -527,13 +527,13 @@ config SERIAL_S3C24A0 Serial port support for the Samsung S3C24A0 SoC config SERIAL_S3C6400 - tristate "Samsung S3C6400/S3C6410/S5P6440/S5P6450/S5PC100 Serial port support" - depends on SERIAL_SAMSUNG && (CPU_S3C6400 || CPU_S3C6410 || CPU_S5P6440 || CPU_S5P6450 || CPU_S5PC100) + tristate "Samsung S3C6400/S3C6410/S5P6440/S5P6450 Serial port support" + depends on SERIAL_SAMSUNG && (CPU_S3C6400 || CPU_S3C6410 || CPU_S5P6440 || CPU_S5P6450) select SERIAL_SAMSUNG_UARTS_4 default y help - Serial port support for the Samsung S3C6400, S3C6410, S5P6440, S5P6450 - and S5PC100 SoCs + Serial port support for the Samsung S3C6400, S3C6410, S5P6440 + and S5P6450 SoCs config SERIAL_S5PV210 tristate "Samsung S5PV210 Serial port support"
Signature · 1 line
1.7.1
PATCH 6/7 video: s3c-fb: Remove to support fb for S5PC100
In reply to Kukjin KimAccording to removing ARCH_S5PC100, we don't need to support fb for S5PC100.
--- drivers/video/s3c-fb.c | 33 --------------------------------- 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
drivers/video/s3c-fb.c +0 -33
@@ -1696,36 +1696,6 @@ static struct s3c_fb_driverdata s3c_fb_data_64xx = { .win[4] = &s3c_fb_data_64xx_wins[4], }; -static struct s3c_fb_driverdata s3c_fb_data_s5pc100 = { - .variant = { - .nr_windows =5 , - .vidtcon =VIDTCON0 , - .wincon =WINCON (0 ), - .winmap =WINxMAP (0 ), - .keycon =WKEYCON , - .osd =VIDOSD_BASE , - .osd_stride =16 , - .buf_start =VIDW_BUF_START (0 ), - .buf_size =VIDW_BUF_SIZE (0 ), - .buf_end =VIDW_BUF_END (0 ), - - .palette = { - [0 ] =0x2400 , - [1 ] =0x2800 , - [2 ] =0x2c00 , - [3 ] =0x3000 , - [4 ] =0x3400 , - }, - - .has_prtcon =1 , - }, - .win[0 ] = &s3c_fb_data_64xx_wins[0 ], - .win[1 ] = &s3c_fb_data_64xx_wins[1 ], - .win[2 ] = &s3c_fb_data_64xx_wins[2 ], - .win[3 ] = &s3c_fb_data_64xx_wins[3 ], - .win[4 ] = &s3c_fb_data_64xx_wins[4 ], -}; -static struct s3c_fb_driverdata s3c_fb_data_s5pv210 = { .variant = { .nr_windows =5 ,
@@ -1797,9 +1767,6 @@ static struct platform_device_id s3c_fb_driver_ids[] = { .name = "s3c-fb", .driver_data = (unsigned long)&s3c_fb_data_64xx, }, { - .name = "s5pc100-fb", - .driver_data = (unsigned long)&s3c_fb_data_s5pc100, - }, { .name = "s5pv210-fb", .driver_data = (unsigned long)&s3c_fb_data_s5pv210, }, {
Signature · 1 line
1.7.1
PATCH 7/7 libata: Remove to support pata for S5PC100
In reply to Kukjin KimAccording to removing ARCH_S5PC100, we don't need to support pata for S5PC100.
--- drivers/ata/pata_samsung_cf.c | 13 ------------- 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
drivers/ata/pata_samsung_cf.c +0 -13
@@ -31,7 +31,6 @@enum s3c_cpu_type {TYPE_S3C64XX , -TYPE_S5PC100 ,TYPE_S5PV210 , };
@@ -453,10 +452,6 @@ static void pata_s3c_hwinit(struct s3c_ide_info *info,writel (0x1b , info->ide_addr +S3C_ATA_IRQ_MSK );break ; -case TYPE_S5PC100 : -pata_s3c_cfg_mode (info->sfr_addr); -/* FALLTHROUGH */ -case TYPE_S5PV210 :/* Configure as little endian */ pata_s3c_set_endian (info->ide_addr,0 );
@@ -538,11 +533,6 @@ static int __init pata_s3c_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) info->sfr_addr = info->ide_addr +0x1800 ; info->ide_addr +=0x1900 ; info->fifo_status_reg =0x94 ; - }else if (cpu_type ==TYPE_S5PC100 ) { - ap->ops = &pata_s5p_port_ops; - info->sfr_addr = info->ide_addr +0x1800 ; - info->ide_addr +=0x1900 ; - info->fifo_status_reg =0x84 ; }else { ap->ops = &pata_s5p_port_ops; info->fifo_status_reg =0x84 ;
@@ -640,9 +630,6 @@ static struct platform_device_id pata_s3c_driver_ids[] = { .name = "s3c64xx-pata", .driver_data = TYPE_S3C64XX, }, { - .name = "s5pc100-pata", - .driver_data = TYPE_S5PC100, - }, { .name = "s5pv210-pata", .driver_data = TYPE_S5PV210, },
Signature · 1 line
1.7.1
PATCH 7/7 libata: Remove to support pata for S5PC100
Quoted 5 lines · Kukjin Kim
According to removing
ARCH_S5PC100, we don't need to support pata for S5PC100.Cc Jeff Garzik<[email protected]>Signed-off-by Kukjin Kim<[email protected]>
cover ARM: Removing ARCH_S5PC100
In reply to Kukjin KimQuoted 1 line · On Thursday 12 May 2011 04:11:07 Kukjin Kim wrote:
This patch remvoes mach-s5pc100 directory for
ARCH_S5PC100inarch/arm.
Hm, what's the point of removing this code?
Quoted 9 lines
If any problems, please let me know immediately.
[PATCH 1/7] ARM: S5PC100: Removing
ARCH_S5PC100
[PATCH 2/7] ASoC: Remove to support sound for S5PC100 [PATCH 3/7] [media] s5p-fimc: Remove to support fimc for S5PC100 [PATCH 4/7] mtd: OneNAND: Remove to support onenand for S5PC100 [PATCH 5/7] tty: Remove to support serial for S5PC100 [PATCH 6/7] video: s3c-fb: Remove to support fb for S5PC100 [PATCH 7/7] libata: Remove to support pata for S5PC100
cover ARM: Removing ARCH_S5PC100
Hello,
Quoted 4 lines · Vasily Khoruzhick
Quoted 1 line · On Thursday 12 May 2011 04:11:07 Kukjin Kim wrote:
This patch remvoes mach-s5pc100 directory for
ARCH_S5PC100inarch/arm.Hm, what's the point of removing this code?
May I also ask the same? What's the point in removing WORKING support for the whole SoC series? There are some S5PC100 based boards available on the market and they are still being used for embedded Linux development.
The issues with ARM kernel tree is not about the number of supported SoCs/sub-platform but the fact that a lots of code is somehow duplicated between different arm sub-architecture. The goal is to identify such code and unify it. There have been a lot of discussion about this on Linaro Meeting in Budapest. For more information please take a look at etherpad notes available here:
http://summit.ubuntu.com/uds-o/track/linaro-kernel/
(etherpad links for each session are available via 'notepad' image near the session title).
I recommend to read all the notes from all five 'Arm Linus Interface' sessions.
Best regards
Signature · 2 lines
Marek Szyprowski Samsung Poland R&D Center
cover ARM: Removing ARCH_S5PC100
Quoted 3 lines · Marek Szyprowski
Hello,
Hi :)
Quoted 4 lines · Vasily Khoruzhick
Quoted 3 lines · On Thursday 12 May 2011 04:11:07 Kukjin Kim wrote:
Quoted 1 line
This patch remvoes mach-s5pc100 directory for
ARCH_S5PC100in
arch/arm.
Quoted 14 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Hm, what's the point of removing this code?
May I also ask the same? What's the point in removing WORKING support for the whole SoC series? There are some S5PC100 based boards available on the market and they are still being used for embedded Linux development.
The issues with ARM kernel tree is not about the number of supported SoCs/sub-platform but the fact that a lots of code is somehow duplicated between different arm sub-architecture. The goal is to identify such code and unify it. There have been a lot of discussion about this on Linaro Meeting in Budapest. For more information please take a look at etherpad notes available here:
Quoted 8 lines
http://summit.ubuntu.com/uds-o/track/linaro-kernel/
(etherpad links for each session are available via 'notepad' image near the session title).
I recommend to read all the notes from all five 'Arm Linus Interface' sessions.
I think, we already discussed about this :)
Hope please refer other my reply on this thread.
Ok, will check about discussion result in last UDS.
Thanks.
Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <[email protected]>, Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
cover ARM: Removing ARCH_S5PC100
In reply to Kukjin KimQuoted 2 lines · Kukjin Kim
This patch remvoes mach-s5pc100 directory for
ARCH_S5PC100inarch/arm. If any problems, please let me know immediately.
Yes, this is a *big* problem for me as I'm actively working on mach-s5pc100.
Unless you happen to know differently, the S5PC100 is still in mass production, and the security cameras my company make all use the S5PC100. There are also a number of other embedded modules currently in production based on the S5PC100.
What reason would you have for removing mach-s5pc100 from Linux?
cover ARM: Removing ARCH_S5PC100
Quoted 6 lines · Nick Pelling
Quoted 2 lines · Kukjin Kim
This patch remvoes mach-s5pc100 directory for
ARCH_S5PC100inarch/arm. If any problems, please let me know immediately.Yes, this is a *big* problem for me as I'm actively working on
mach-s5pc100.
Quoted 7 lines
Unless you happen to know differently, the S5PC100 is still in mass production, and the security cameras my company make all use the S5PC100. There are also a number of other embedded modules currently in production based on the S5PC100.
What reason would you have for removing mach-s5pc100 from Linux?
Thanks for your opinion :)
Yes, I think it's rather premature to decide it at this time. So this is dropped now and will merge with other samsung stuff next time ;)
Thanks.
Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <[email protected]>, Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
cover ARM: Removing ARCH_S5PC100
Quoted 4 lines · On Wednesday 18 May 2011 11:53:22 Kukjin Kim wrote:
Thanks for your opinion :)
Yes, I think it's rather premature to decide it at this time. So this is dropped now and will merge with other samsung stuff next time ;)
Still see to reason to drop s5pc100 support from mainline (even not now, but later)
Regards
Vasily
cover ARM: Removing ARCH_S5PC100
In reply to Kukjin KimHI,
why do you remove it?
Best Regards,
J.
Quoted 16 lines · Kukjin Kim
This patch remvoes mach-s5pc100 directory for
ARCH_S5PC100inarch/arm.If any problems, please let me know immediately.
[PATCH 1/7] ARM: S5PC100: Removing
ARCH_S5PC100
[PATCH 2/7] ASoC: Remove to support sound for S5PC100 [PATCH 3/7] [media] s5p-fimc: Remove to support fimc for S5PC100 [PATCH 4/7] mtd: OneNAND: Remove to support onenand for S5PC100 [PATCH 5/7] tty: Remove to support serial for S5PC100 [PATCH 6/7] video: s3c-fb: Remove to support fb for S5PC100 [PATCH 7/7] libata: Remove to support pata for S5PC100_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
cover ARM: Removing ARCH_S5PC100
Quoted 3 lines · Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
HI,
Hi,
Quoted 2 lines
why do you remove it?
Thanks for your concerns :)
I think it's rather premature to decide it at this time.
So this is dropped at this moment...but as a note, I will implement this into other samsung stuff next time :)
Thanks.
Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <[email protected]>, Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
Quoted 12 lines · Kukjin Kim
Quoted 11 lines
This patch remvoes mach-s5pc100 directory for
ARCH_S5PC100inarch/arm.If any problems, please let me know immediately.
[PATCH 1/7] ARM: S5PC100: Removing
ARCH_S5PC100
[PATCH 2/7] ASoC: Remove to support sound for S5PC100 [PATCH 3/7] [media] s5p-fimc: Remove to support fimc for S5PC100 [PATCH 4/7] mtd: OneNAND: Remove to support onenand for S5PC100 [PATCH 5/7] tty: Remove to support serial for S5PC100 [PATCH 6/7] video: s3c-fb: Remove to support fb for S5PC100 [PATCH 7/7] libata: Remove to support pata for S5PC100
cover ARM: Removing ARCH_S5PC100
Quoted 6 lines · Kukjin Kim
Quoted 3 lines · Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
HI,
Hi,
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 2 lines
why do you remove it?
Thanks for your concerns :)
I think it's rather premature to decide it at this time.
So this is dropped at this moment...but as a note, I will implement this into other samsung stuff next time :)
I think that we should implement SoC support with more unified way _before_ removing working code, not after.
Quoted 27 lines
Thanks.
Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <[email protected]>, Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.Quoted 5 lines · Kukjin Kim
Quoted 4 lines
This patch remvoes mach-s5pc100 directory for
ARCH_S5PC100inarch/arm.If any problems, please let me know immediately.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 7 lines
[PATCH 1/7] ARM: S5PC100: Removing
ARCH_S5PC100
[PATCH 2/7] ASoC: Remove to support sound for S5PC100 [PATCH 3/7] [media] s5p-fimc: Remove to support fimc for S5PC100 [PATCH 4/7] mtd: OneNAND: Remove to support onenand for S5PC100 [PATCH 5/7] tty: Remove to support serial for S5PC100 [PATCH 6/7] video: s3c-fb: Remove to support fb for S5PC100 [PATCH 7/7] libata: Remove to support pata for S5PC100_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
Signature · 6 lines
Yauhen Kharuzhy jekhor _at_ gmail.com JID: jek at jabber.ru skype: jekhor A: No Q: Should I quote below my post?
cover ARM: Removing ARCH_S5PC100
Quoted 9 lines · Yauhen Kharuzhy
Quoted 8 lines · Kukjin Kim
Quoted 3 lines · Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
HI,
Hi,
Quoted 2 lines
why do you remove it?
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Thanks for your concerns :)
I think it's rather premature to decide it at this time.
So this is dropped at this moment...but as a note, I will implement this into other samsung stuff next time :)I think that we should implement SoC support with more unified way _before_ removing working code, not after.
agreed for my point of view NACK to remove working code
Russell do you agree?
Best Regards,
J.