[RE: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Remove some e500/MPC85xx evaluation platforms] On 14/04/2023 (Fri 23:29) Leo Li wrote:
> > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Michael Ellerman <m...@ellerman.id.au> > > Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2023 9:14 PM > > To: Leo Li <leoyang...@nxp.com>; Paul Gortmaker > > <paul.gortma...@windriver.com> > > Cc: Scott Wood <o...@buserror.net>; Paul Mackerras <pau...@samba.org>; > > Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.man...@nxp.com>; linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org; > > Pali Roh??r <p...@kernel.org> > > Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Remove some e500/MPC85xx evaluation > > platforms > > > > Li Yang <leoyang...@nxp.com> writes: > > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 1:52???PM Paul Gortmaker > > > <paul.gortma...@windriver.com> wrote: > > >> > > >> [This RFC is proposed for v6.4 and hence is based off linux-next.] > > >> > > >> In a similar theme to the e300/MPC83xx evaluation platform > > >> removal[1], this targets removal of some 13 --> 21 year old > > >> e500/MPC85xx evaluation boards that were produced in limited numbers > > >> and primarily made available to hardware/software developers to shape > > their own boards and BSPs. > > > > > > These e500 platforms are similar to the e300 platforms that they are > > > still being shipped, the targeting market probably caused it to have a > > > longer life cycle. > > > > > ... > > > > > > The difference here from the e300 platforms is that MPC8540ADS, > > > MPC8560ADS, MPC8548CDS, MPC8568-MDS are the only reference > > platforms > > > supplied by us for these SoCs. We don't have a separation of > > > evaluation platforms vs product-like platforms like we did later. > > > That probably means even if they don't look like "hobbyist" friendly > > > they are more likely to be still in use. > > > > OK. But what is the chance anyone is booting upstream kernels on them? > > We do still have these parts shipped, which means that there are definitely > active users of these silicons. But it is really hard to say how many of > they are running latest upstream kernel. IMO, if the nature of the > application is critical it is likely they will need to update the kernel to > get all the security fixes. And the reference board will be helpful as a > starting point when they update the kernel. I think the right thing to do here with this series is to remove the super ancient 20+ year old MPC8540ADS and MPC8560ADS; and leave the slightly more modern ones for another day in the future. I don't think anyone can realistically argue against that? Paul. -- > > > > > I assume no one at NXP is testing upstream on those boards? > > To be frank they are not included in the routine tests carried out by the > development team now which is not ideal to me. But I think the support team > are probably willing to help on issues with latest kernel when needed. > > Regards, > Leo
