Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758435Ab2EDOiJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 May 2012 10:38:09 -0400 Received: from stoneboat.aleph1.co.uk ([80.68.88.63]:37965 "EHLO stoneboat.aleph1.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752948Ab2EDOiH (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 May 2012 10:38:07 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 1024 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Fri, 04 May 2012 10:38:07 EDT Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 15:20:57 +0100 From: Wookey To: Deepak Saxena Cc: Arnd Bergmann , Kukjin Kim , linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org, Jason Cooper , Nicolas Pitre , Tony Lindgren , Magnus Damm , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Olof Johansson , Russell King - ARM Linux , Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD , Sascha Hauer , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: Making ARM multiplatform kernels DT-only? Message-ID: <20120504142057.GQ27023@stoneboat.aleph1.co.uk> Mail-Followup-To: Deepak Saxena , Arnd Bergmann , Kukjin Kim , linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org, Jason Cooper , Nicolas Pitre , Tony Lindgren , Magnus Damm , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Olof Johansson , Russell King - ARM Linux , Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD , Sascha Hauer , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org References: <201205031350.35476.arnd@arndb.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: Wookware User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: wookey@wookware.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on stoneboat.aleph1.co.uk); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2368 Lines: 55 +++ Deepak Saxena [2012-05-03 22:38 -0700]: > I'm of the opinion that we support DT only platforms for > multi-platform but this is based on the approach of only caring for > multi-platform for newer systems and not worrying too much for legacy > HW. I don't expect distros (the > main users of a single zImage IMHO) to spend many cycles on older > platforms Well, it depends exactly what you mean by 'older', and 'spend many cycles', but distros certainly care about relatively old platforms, because that's often what users have on their desks, and that is the driver for what is supported. Debian tries very hard not to support anything in the kernel that upstream don't support in the kernel because otherwise it's way too much work. The current list of supplied arm kernels is: iop32x (ThecusN2100, intel SS4000, GLAN tank) ixp4xx (Linksys NSLU2) kirkwood (*plugs, QNAP NAS, OPenRD) orion5x (QNAP NAS, HP mv2120) versatile mx5 omap because that's a good compromise between coverage and 'building 20-odd images'. I have no idea how much of that lot is going to get DTified, but I'm guessing the older stuff won't be? We are keen on multiplatform kernels because building a great pile of different ones is a massive pain (and not just for arm because it holds up security updates), and if we could still cover all that lot with one kernel, or indeed any number less than 7 that would be great. But the focus is very much on 'still in use' hardware, not just 'still newly available' hardware, and definately not 'will be available sometime' hardware. So I think that means we'd vote for multiple zImages that did support non-DT platforms, but my impression of the available effort is that we'll take what we're given and make the best of it. If the older stuff has to be supported with current-style one-platform/few machines kernels then we'll carry on supporting them like that until no-one cares any more or it's too hard. Note that that I'm not involved with the Debian arm kernel team, so this is merely my general impression from afar. Someone closer to the problem could be more authoratative. Wookey -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/