From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 204BBC4320A for ; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 15:59:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAFF86104F for ; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 15:59:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S237189AbhHCP7p (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Aug 2021 11:59:45 -0400 Received: from mail.savoirfairelinux.com ([208.88.110.44]:40922 "EHLO mail.savoirfairelinux.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S237184AbhHCP7l (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Aug 2021 11:59:41 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 439 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Tue, 03 Aug 2021 11:59:41 EDT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.savoirfairelinux.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 897E09C0C99; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 11:52:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.savoirfairelinux.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.savoirfairelinux.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id D5cXTajtjGVF; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 11:52:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.savoirfairelinux.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 178419C1908; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 11:52:10 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail.savoirfairelinux.com Received: from mail.savoirfairelinux.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.savoirfairelinux.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id ko32_KOWxwba; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 11:52:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.savoirfairelinux.com (mail.savoirfairelinux.com [192.168.48.237]) by mail.savoirfairelinux.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD2A59C0C99; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 11:52:09 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2021 11:52:09 -0400 (EDT) From: Jerome Oufella To: Arnd Bergmann List-Id: Cc: martinwguy , Russell King , Hartley Sweeten , Alexander Sverdlin , SoC Team , Nikita Shubin , Arnd Bergmann , Oleg Nesterov , Hubert Feurstein , Lukasz Majewski , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Nathan Chancellor , Nick Desaulniers , Linus Walleij , Linux ARM , Linux Kernel Mailing List , clang-built-linux Message-ID: <817752520.64672.1628005929651.JavaMail.zimbra@savoirfairelinux.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20210802141245.1146772-1-arnd@kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: ep93xx: remove MaverickCrunch support MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.8.15_GA_4101 (ZimbraWebClient - GC92 (Linux)/8.8.15_GA_4059) Thread-Topic: ep93xx: remove MaverickCrunch support Thread-Index: AhRjygBp3+fyk/ZVaeE61BpHQHrtaA== Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Aug 3, 2021, at 7:58 AM, Arnd Bergmann arnd@kernel.org wrote: > On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 1:41 PM Martin Guy wrote: >> >> I forward opinion from people currently producing and supporting EP93XX boards: > > Thanks a lot for bringing them in. I definitely don't want to remove support for > something that is actively being used, and we don't have to merge the patch > if they currently rely on MaverickCrunch on older platforms. > > It does sound however like Jerome's customers are using a normal (softfloat) > Linus distro on EP93xx, rather than one using the original MaverickCrunch > FPU instructions. There are no plans to discontinue EP93xx support, there > is actually a good amount of recent work going into updating the platform. > > Jerome, please let me know if I understood you correctly here. If your > customers do rely on MaverickCrunch support in user space, I would > leave that in the kernel for as long as ep93xx itself is supported, and instead > require building support with the GNU assembler to avoid having to > add support to the clang integrated assembler. If you don't know of anyone > using MaverickCrunch, I would go ahead with my patch to remove kernel > support. > > Arnd Arnd, You are correct on assuming usage of softfloat toolchains and not using the MaverickCrunch unit. AFAIK, I am not aware of active users of this FPU on recent setups. Jerome