On 28/02/2018 07:11, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 27.02.2018 12:51, Peter Maydell wrote: >> I propose that we deprecate and plan to remove the unicore32 code: > [...] >> Essentially, it seems to be a largely-inactive university R&D project, >> it's costing us in maintenance effort every time we have to touch it, >> and I don't think it has any real users. >> >> Does anybody disagree? >> >> If we go ahead with deprecating then we should: >> * add a note to Changelog that we're deprecating the target >> * ditto qemu-doc.texi's deprecation section >> * patch hw/unicore32/puv3.c to warn on startup that it's deprecated >> * remove it entirely for the 2.14 release >> >> We could also remove linux-user/unicore32 immediately, since >> the linux-user target has been disabled for some time. > > Sounds reasonable to me, but let's wait a week or two for feedback from > Guan Xuetao.
Sounds good---thought I would consider dropping unicore32 now with no formal deprecation period... >> Possibly there are other target architectures we could reasonably >> deprecate-and-remove (though none of the other ones Linux is dropping >> in this round are ones we support)... > > I'd vote for marking tilegx as deprecated, too, since we even do not > have an active maintainer for that CPU core (at least I did not spot one > in our MAINTAINERS file). Opinions? Tilegx has been last modified in 2015, so it's a little more alive than unicore32. Another one is moxie. Anthony? Thanks, Paolo
