Hi Hans-Cristrian, On Fri, 24 Feb 2017 09:14:30 +0100 Hans-Christian Noren Egtvedt <egtv...@samfundet.no> wrote:
> Around Thu 23 Feb 2017 21:18:13 -0800 or thereabout, Håvard Skinnemoen wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Alexandre Belloni > > <alexandre.bell...@free-electrons.com> wrote: > >> On 21/02/2017 at 18:43:35 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > <snipp> > > >> A few weeks ago, I was telling Boris to let it not build for a while and > >> then remove it. You already went out of your way to make it work. Again, > >> feel free to send a patch removing avr32. I can only see a lot of > >> benefits for the Atmel ARM SoCs and the many cleanups that will follow. > > > > Agree, I can't help but feel that the AVR32 support is doing more harm > > than good at this point. > > I also agree on this, I can relate to Nicolas (and Atmel friends) having to > always think about the less-maintained AVR32 parts when improving drivers. Indeed, that should make atmel drivers maintainance a bit easier. > > >> If nobody complains about the 4.10 breakage, You'll have plenty of time > >> to remove it for 4.12 > > > > I'm fine with that, but I haven't put much effort into keeping it > > alive lately. If Hans-Christian agrees, I'm willing to post a patch to > > remove it, or ack someone else's patch. > > Then lets plan this for 4.12, either you Håvard whip up a patch or I can > eventually do it. > > I can push it through the linux-avr32 git tree on kernel.org. > Can you do that just after 4.11-rc1 is released and provide a topic branch I can pull in my nand/next branch, so that I can rework this patch and drop all the pdata-compat code (as suggested by Andy). Thanks, Boris
