Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] PPC: remove support for MPC82xx processors
Hi Wolfgang, On 01/15/2014 08:48 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: This commit removes support for the Freescale MPC82xx Power Architecture processors, i. e. MPC8240, MPC8245, MPC8247, MPC8248, MPC8250, MPC8255, MPC8260, MPC8265, MPC8266, MPC8272, MPC8280, ... They have been out of production for years, and no active users left here. As some boards start causing problems, let's drop the obsolete and now dead code. thats not valid for us. Our mgcoge3ne target which comes with a MPC8247 is still in production and maintained. If you look at the git log of include/configs/km82xx.h you will see that there were still commits in 2013. Even if there are no further changes expected yet, it's still possible that we need to adapt something e.g. if the SDRAM needs to be replaced in the future. So isn't it possible to remove only the broken boards and keep the generic parts? Best regards Holger ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] PPC: remove support for MPC82xx processors
Dear Holger, In message 52d64089.6070...@keymile.com you wrote: This commit removes support for the Freescale MPC82xx Power Architecture processors, i. e. MPC8240, MPC8245, MPC8247, MPC8248, MPC8250, MPC8255, MPC8260, MPC8265, MPC8266, MPC8272, MPC8280, ... They have been out of production for years, and no active users left here. As some boards start causing problems, let's drop the obsolete and now dead code. thats not valid for us. Our mgcoge3ne target which comes with a MPC8247 is still in production and maintained. If you look at the git log of Argh... Can you foresee how much longer this hardware is likely to be maintained? So isn't it possible to remove only the broken boards and keep the generic parts? Yes, this would be possible, too. But then, it appears you are the only remaining active user of MPC82xx. OK, MPC8247 is actually still marked as active at Freescale, soory I missed that - the MPC824x types I checked were in No Longer Manufactured state. The thing is that there are tons of interdependencies an #defines that need to be checked so we don't leave too many unused #defines and such around. I see several options now: 1) We apply the patch as is, and if you really have to modify your code you would do this out-of-tree based on the last frozen version. 2) I rework the patch to remove only the MPC826x / MPC828x code. 3) I rework the patch to remove only the broken boards - which are these actually? Tom, what is your opinion here? Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de Is there a way to determine Yesterday's date using Unix utilities? echo what is yesterday's date? | /bin/mail root -- Randal L. Schwartz in ukbuh2y982@julie.teleport.com ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] PPC: remove support for MPC82xx processors
Hello Wolfgang, On 01/15/2014 12:04 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: Dear Holger, In message 52d64089.6070...@keymile.com you wrote: This commit removes support for the Freescale MPC82xx Power Architecture processors, i. e. MPC8240, MPC8245, MPC8247, MPC8248, MPC8250, MPC8255, MPC8260, MPC8265, MPC8266, MPC8272, MPC8280, ... They have been out of production for years, and no active users left here. As some boards start causing problems, let's drop the obsolete and now dead code. thats not valid for us. Our mgcoge3ne target which comes with a MPC8247 is still in production and maintained. If you look at the git log of Argh... Can you foresee how much longer this hardware is likely to be maintained? uhm. There is currently no plan to stop the production of this board. So for the next two years at least I would expect that they were still produced. And as a sidenode I still have the request on my desk to integrate the POST tests for this board, which we already have for our PPC83xx and kirkwood boards. So isn't it possible to remove only the broken boards and keep the generic parts? Yes, this would be possible, too. But then, it appears you are the only remaining active user of MPC82xx. OK, MPC8247 is actually still marked as active at Freescale, soory I missed that - the MPC824x types I checked were in No Longer Manufactured state. The thing is that there are tons of interdependencies an #defines that need to be checked so we don't leave too many unused #defines and such around. yes I understand the desire to remove as much as unneeded code as possible. I see several options now: 1) We apply the patch as is, and if you really have to modify your code you would do this out-of-tree based on the last frozen version. yes we could do that and keep a seperate branch for this board, but I don't like this. I guess I don't need to explain why I would like to avoid an additional branch on our site. 2) I rework the patch to remove only the MPC826x / MPC828x code. honestly this would be my favorite approach. So if keeping 82xx support would't generate to much overload for u-boot I would appreciate to keep it. But if it interferes with future u-boot development we could also move it to a keymile specific branch. And just out of curiosity. Why do you keep still 8xx board support? Is this more in use then 82xx? This is suprising to me. Regards Holger ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] PPC: remove support for MPC82xx processors
Dear Holger, In message 52d67c60.2040...@keymile.com you wrote: 1) We apply the patch as is, and if you really have to modify your code you would do this out-of-tree based on the last frozen version. yes we could do that and keep a seperate branch for this board, but I don't like this. I guess I don't need to explain why I would like to avoid an additional branch on our site. Fully understood. If you can foresee another two years of active use this is a perfectly valid reason not to remove this file. Sorry I missed this in the beginning... 2) I rework the patch to remove only the MPC826x / MPC828x code. honestly this would be my favorite approach. Tom - how much time is there left for me to do that? So if keeping 82xx support would't generate to much overload for u-boot I would appreciate to keep it. But if it interferes with future u-boot development we could also move it to a keymile specific branch. Do you agree with keeping 824x support only? And just out of curiosity. Why do you keep still 8xx board support? Is this more in use then 82xx? This is suprising to me. You are asking a heretical question! ;-) 8xx is where it all started - U-Boot was anteceded by the PPCBoot project, which started as 8xxrom - some 15 years ago... Ripping this out of U-Boot would just break my heart... Seriously, when the 8xx code is starting to make similar problems like 82xx is doing now, we will probably come to the same conclusions (allthough my heart would be bleeding) but so far everything is fine - individual boards breakage (like TOP860 with gcc 4.8) excluded. Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de Don't put off for tomorrow what you can do today, because if you enjoy it today you can do it again tomorrow. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] PPC: remove support for MPC82xx processors
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 12:04:10PM +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote: Dear Holger, In message 52d64089.6070...@keymile.com you wrote: This commit removes support for the Freescale MPC82xx Power Architecture processors, i. e. MPC8240, MPC8245, MPC8247, MPC8248, MPC8250, MPC8255, MPC8260, MPC8265, MPC8266, MPC8272, MPC8280, ... They have been out of production for years, and no active users left here. As some boards start causing problems, let's drop the obsolete and now dead code. thats not valid for us. Our mgcoge3ne target which comes with a MPC8247 is still in production and maintained. If you look at the git log of Argh... Can you foresee how much longer this hardware is likely to be maintained? So isn't it possible to remove only the broken boards and keep the generic parts? Yes, this would be possible, too. But then, it appears you are the only remaining active user of MPC82xx. OK, MPC8247 is actually still marked as active at Freescale, soory I missed that - the MPC824x types I checked were in No Longer Manufactured state. The thing is that there are tons of interdependencies an #defines that need to be checked so we don't leave too many unused #defines and such around. I see several options now: 1) We apply the patch as is, and if you really have to modify your code you would do this out-of-tree based on the last frozen version. 2) I rework the patch to remove only the MPC826x / MPC828x code. 3) I rework the patch to remove only the broken boards - which are these actually? Tom, what is your opinion here? For this release, lets go with #3, which is already done (York grabbed the patch to drop linkstation_HGLAN and that was the only FTB) and then for the next release we can do #2 if there's no objections. -- Tom signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] PPC: remove support for MPC82xx processors
You are asking a heretical question! ;-) 8xx is where it all started - U-Boot was anteceded by the PPCBoot project, which started as 8xxrom - some 15 years ago... Ripping this out of U-Boot would just break my heart... hear,hear :) We started 14 years ago with 8xx and PPCBoot. 8xx have a special place in my heart too. Seriously, when the 8xx code is starting to make similar problems like 82xx is doing now, we will probably come to the same conclusions (allthough my heart would be bleeding) but so far everything is fine - individual boards breakage (like TOP860 with gcc 4.8) excluded. Best regards, Wolfgang Denk ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] PPC: remove support for MPC82xx processors
/me sniffs High five... On Jan 15, 2014, at 3:55 PM, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: You are asking a heretical question! ;-) 8xx is where it all started - U-Boot was anteceded by the PPCBoot project, which started as 8xxrom - some 15 years ago... Ripping this out of U-Boot would just break my heart... hear,hear :) We started 14 years ago with 8xx and PPCBoot. 8xx have a special place in my heart too. Seriously, when the 8xx code is starting to make similar problems like 82xx is doing now, we will probably come to the same conclusions (allthough my heart would be bleeding) but so far everything is fine - individual boards breakage (like TOP860 with gcc 4.8) excluded. Best regards, Wolfgang Denk ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] PPC: remove support for MPC82xx processors
Hi Wolfgang, On 01/15/2014 01:45 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: So if keeping 82xx support would't generate to much overload for u-boot I would appreciate to keep it. But if it interferes with future u-boot development we could also move it to a keymile specific branch. Do you agree with keeping 824x support only? is this question adressed to myside or to Tom? From myside it's absolutely ok to keep 824x only. Regards Holger ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] PPC: remove support for MPC82xx processors
Dear Holger, In message 52d6beb7.5010...@keymile.com you wrote: Do you agree with keeping 824x support only? is this question adressed to myside or to Tom? From myside it's absolutely ok to keep 824x only. It was directed at you. But in the meantime I've also been told that MPC8280 is also still active (and some guys are probably going to continue building it for the next 10 years), so we will keep it all, and just throw out the offending boards. Thanks. Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de You got to learn three things. What's real, what's not real, and what's the difference. - Terry Pratchett, _Witches Abroad_ ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] PPC: remove support for MPC82xx processors
On Jan 15, 2014, at 2:11 PM, Wolfgang Denk w...@denx.de wrote: ….. so we will keep it all, and just throw out the offending boards. Cool! :) I'll have to dig out some old boards and see if they still work. Thanks. -- Dan ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] PPC: remove support for MPC82xx processors
On Wed, 2014-01-15 at 12:04 +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote: Dear Holger, In message 52d64089.6070...@keymile.com you wrote: This commit removes support for the Freescale MPC82xx Power Architecture processors, i. e. MPC8240, MPC8245, MPC8247, MPC8248, MPC8250, MPC8255, MPC8260, MPC8265, MPC8266, MPC8272, MPC8280, ... They have been out of production for years, and no active users left here. As some boards start causing problems, let's drop the obsolete and now dead code. thats not valid for us. Our mgcoge3ne target which comes with a MPC8247 is still in production and maintained. If you look at the git log of Argh... Can you foresee how much longer this hardware is likely to be maintained? So isn't it possible to remove only the broken boards and keep the generic parts? Yes, this would be possible, too. But then, it appears you are the only remaining active user of MPC82xx. OK, MPC8247 is actually still marked as active at Freescale, soory I missed that - the MPC824x types I checked were in No Longer Manufactured state. I see plenty of mpc82xx listed as active on freescale.com, e.g.: http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=MPC8272tab=Buy_Parametric_Tablang_cd= http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=MPC8280tab=Buy_Parametric_Tablang_cd= http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=MPC8248tab=Buy_Parametric_Tablang_cd= http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=MPC8245tab=Buy_Parametric_Tablang_cd= Likewise for 8xx. It does appear that MPC8240 is No Longer Manufactured and MPC8241 is Not Recommended for New Design. Of course, whether a particular piece of code has anyone willing to maintain it is a separate question. -Scott ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
