[RFC PATCH 0/4] Remove some e500/MPC85xx evaluation platforms

[Pali Rohár]

On Tuesday 21 February 2023 16:35:54 Paul Gortmaker wrote:
> [Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Remove some e500/MPC85xx evaluation platforms] On 21/02/2023 (Tue 21:13) Pali Roh??r wrote:
> 
> > Hello! I would like to let you know that I have there patch series which
> > creates one generic machine descriptor for all P2 boards:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linuxppc-dev/20230218111405.27688-1-pali@kernel.org/
> > 
> > Basically it allows any P2 board to boot one universal kernel binary
> > just with correct DTS file. After P2 is merged I was thinking about
> > looking at P1 boards too.
> > 
> > So I would suggest to do some "big" removal of older code after this is
> > merged, so I do not have to rebase again my patch series which is
> > basically cleanup and make maintenance easier.
> 
> Thanks for the update -- I don't want to make extra work for anyone.
> 
> If I drop the MPC8568/P1 removal for now, then would you agree that your work
> and the remaining changes - this ADS/CDS removal can continue in parallel?

I hope that Christophe review my patches soon.

I'm looking again at my and your changes and seems that there should not
be conflicts because my patches touches only mpc85xx_ds.c+mpc85xx_rdb.c
and your changes touches remaining mpc85xx_*.c board files.

About P1 I have not decided if I do some code work in this area.
I wanted to look at it (and if it is big maybe I just drop my idea).

So I think both your and my patch series could continue in parallel (in
case they are not going to be bigger).

> Thanks,
> Paul.
> --
> 
> > 
> > I understand that removing old machine descriptions with board code for
> > old boards which nobody use and nobody wants to maintain is logical
> > step.
> > 
> > But if something like generic machine descriptor for P1 happens too
> > (like I did for P2 in above patch series), it would mean that the only
> > board specific information would be stored in DTS files.
> > And does it make sense to remove just old DTS files? Are there any
> > maintenance with them? (Do not take it wrong, just I'm asking)