On Sat, Oct 19, 2019 at 4:20 PM Lubomir Rintel <lkund...@v3.sk> wrote: > On Fri, 2019-10-18 at 17:41 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > There is a third board named TavorEVB in the Kconfig description, > > but this refers to the "TTC_DKB" machine. The two are clearly > > related, so I change the Kconfig description to just list both > > names. > > > > Cc: Lubomir Rintel <lkund...@v3.sk> > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de> > > Reviewed-by: Lubomir Rintel <lkund...@v3.sk> > > In fact, I'd love to see more non-DT boards go from mach-mmp. There are > good indications nobody is looking after MMP2-based "Jasper", "Flint" > and "Brownstone" and they probably weren't seen outside Marvell either. > The latter has a DTS file. > > Would anybody miss them?
Probably not, but I had a hard time identifying any boards in mmp and some other platforms that are actually worth keeping. Back in the days, a common way the platforms were maintained was to only have the official development board in mainline Linux, while many products were left with out of tree board files. This means it's impossible to see which SoCs actually got used in the field and which ones did not. It also means the other machines stopped getting forward-ported and nobody could test the mainline changes. I wouldn't mind just removing all of the machines that were clearly reference hardware rather than actual products unless we know of someone still using them. In case of MMP, that doesn't leave a lot though, the gplugD is the only one that clearly meant as an end-user product. I'd also leave all the DT based platforms as a rule, mainly because the DT has made it possible to support additional boards with a custom dt blob and no kernel changes. If you have any more insight into what particular boards actually were used for, and which ones can get removed, that would be very welcome. Arnd