Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Drop support for Renesas H8/300 architecture
Thank you for your valuable information: it will let kernel waste mails less, and also can save my time resources. On 09/04/2013 04:59 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 08:39:38PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 11:52:17AM +0800, Chen Gang F T wrote: >> >>> extreme sample: let 'kernel code style' and 'gcc code style' in one file, >>> that will make the code very ugly. >> >> gcc style will make any code very ugly, no matter what (if anything) else is >> in the same file... >> Hmm... for me, I don't check/judge the 'coding style' of different products, what I focus on is to follow the original product 'coding style'. e.g. Windows, gcc, Linux kernel, their 'coding styles' are quite different with each other. Originally I worked under Windows, I followed Windows coding style. Now I worked under Linux kernel, I follow Linux kernel coding style. I plan to make patch for gcc, I will follow gcc coding style. (hope this month I can, but I am not sure, I have no experience for gcc development). And excuse me, I will be silent during 2013-09-05 - 2013-09-20 (but can response mail). During these days, I will focus on gcc issues (wish can fix one), and also do some company's internal things. Thanks. >> [digs out the ports history table] >> x86: 0.01[alive] >> i386: 0.01..2.6.24-rc1 [folded into x86] >> x86_64: 2.5.5-pre1..2.6.24-rc1 [folded into x86] >> x86:2.6.24-rc1 [alive] >> alpha: 1.1.67 [alive] >> sparc: 1.1.77 [alive] >> sparc64:2.1.19..2.6.28 [folded into sparc] >> mips:1.1.82 [alive] >> mips64: 2.3.48-pre2..2.6.0-test2 [folded into mips] >> powerpc: 1.3.45 [alive] >> ppc:1.3.45..2.6.26 [folded into powerpc] >> ppc64: 2.5.5..2.6.15-rc1 [folded into powerpc] >> powerpc:2.6.15-rc1 [alive] >> m68k:1.3.94 [alive] >> m68knommu: 2.5.46..2.6.38 [folded into m68k] >> arm: 2.1.80 [alive] >> arm26: 2.5.71..2.6.23-rc2 [gone] >> arm64: 3.7-rc1 [alive][might eventually fold] >> sh: 2.3.16 [alive] >> sh64: 2.6.8-rc1..2.6.24 [folded into sh, nearly dead there] >> ia64:2.3.43-pre1 [alive] >> s390:2.3.99pre8 [alive] >> s390x: 2.5.0..2.5.67 [folded into s390] >> parisc: 2.4.0-test12[alive] >> cris:2.5.0 [alive] >> um: 2.5.35 [alive] >> v850:2.5.46..2.6.26 [gone] >> h8300: 2.5.68 [moderately responsive] >> m32r:2.6.9-rc3 [alive] >> frv: 2.6.11-rc1 [alive] >> xtensa: 2.6.13-rc1 [alive] >> avr32: 2.6.19-rc1 [alive] >> blackfin:2.6.22-rc1 [alive] >> mn10300: 2.6.25-rc1 [alive] >> microblaze: 2.6.30-rc2 [alive] >> score: 2.6.32-rc1 [abandoned][cloned off mips] >> tile:2.6.36-rc1 [alive] >> unicore32: 2.6.39-rc1 [alive][cloned off arm] >> openrisc:3.1-rc1 [alive] >> hexagon: 3.2-rc1 [alive] >> c6x: 3.3-rc1 [alive] >> arc: 3.9-rc1 [alive] >> metag: 3.9-rc1 [alive] >> >> Frankly, I would've expected score and lefotvers of sh64 (aka sh5) to be >> the first against the wall - h8300 was a bit surprising... >> > > Great summary. > > There seemed to be a consensus to remove h8300, at least so far and > sufficiently > enough for me to ask Stephen to add the removal branch to linux-next. > We'll see if that triggers any further responses. > > With score, I am not entirely sure. I got one Ack for the removal, but > on the other side the score maintainers came back and claimed they would > still support it. We'll see if anything changes in practice. I am still > not sure if I should ask for the removal branch to be added to linux-next. > Frankly I thought I might jump the gun here more than with h8300. > > Either case, what to ultimately do with those two architectures will be > up to the community to decide. > > Guenter > Thanks again. -- Chen Gang -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Drop support for Renesas H8/300 architecture
On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 08:39:38PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 11:52:17AM +0800, Chen Gang F T wrote: > > > extreme sample: let 'kernel code style' and 'gcc code style' in one file, > > that will make the code very ugly. > > gcc style will make any code very ugly, no matter what (if anything) else is > in the same file... > > [digs out the ports history table] > x86: 0.01[alive] > i386: 0.01..2.6.24-rc1 [folded into x86] > x86_64: 2.5.5-pre1..2.6.24-rc1 [folded into x86] > x86:2.6.24-rc1 [alive] > alpha:1.1.67 [alive] > sparc:1.1.77 [alive] > sparc64:2.1.19..2.6.28 [folded into sparc] > mips: 1.1.82 [alive] > mips64: 2.3.48-pre2..2.6.0-test2 [folded into mips] > powerpc: 1.3.45 [alive] > ppc:1.3.45..2.6.26 [folded into powerpc] > ppc64: 2.5.5..2.6.15-rc1 [folded into powerpc] > powerpc:2.6.15-rc1 [alive] > m68k: 1.3.94 [alive] > m68knommu: 2.5.46..2.6.38 [folded into m68k] > arm: 2.1.80 [alive] > arm26: 2.5.71..2.6.23-rc2 [gone] > arm64: 3.7-rc1 [alive][might eventually fold] > sh: 2.3.16 [alive] > sh64: 2.6.8-rc1..2.6.24 [folded into sh, nearly dead there] > ia64: 2.3.43-pre1 [alive] > s390: 2.3.99pre8 [alive] > s390x: 2.5.0..2.5.67 [folded into s390] > parisc: 2.4.0-test12[alive] > cris: 2.5.0 [alive] > um: 2.5.35 [alive] > v850: 2.5.46..2.6.26 [gone] > h8300:2.5.68 [moderately responsive] > m32r: 2.6.9-rc3 [alive] > frv: 2.6.11-rc1 [alive] > xtensa: 2.6.13-rc1 [alive] > avr32:2.6.19-rc1 [alive] > blackfin: 2.6.22-rc1 [alive] > mn10300: 2.6.25-rc1 [alive] > microblaze: 2.6.30-rc2 [alive] > score:2.6.32-rc1 [abandoned][cloned off mips] > tile: 2.6.36-rc1 [alive] > unicore32:2.6.39-rc1 [alive][cloned off arm] > openrisc: 3.1-rc1 [alive] > hexagon: 3.2-rc1 [alive] > c6x: 3.3-rc1 [alive] > arc: 3.9-rc1 [alive] > metag:3.9-rc1 [alive] > > Frankly, I would've expected score and lefotvers of sh64 (aka sh5) to be > the first against the wall - h8300 was a bit surprising... > Great summary. There seemed to be a consensus to remove h8300, at least so far and sufficiently enough for me to ask Stephen to add the removal branch to linux-next. We'll see if that triggers any further responses. With score, I am not entirely sure. I got one Ack for the removal, but on the other side the score maintainers came back and claimed they would still support it. We'll see if anything changes in practice. I am still not sure if I should ask for the removal branch to be added to linux-next. Frankly I thought I might jump the gun here more than with h8300. Either case, what to ultimately do with those two architectures will be up to the community to decide. Guenter -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Drop support for Renesas H8/300 architecture
On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 11:52:17AM +0800, Chen Gang F T wrote: > extreme sample: let 'kernel code style' and 'gcc code style' in one file, > that will make the code very ugly. gcc style will make any code very ugly, no matter what (if anything) else is in the same file... [digs out the ports history table] x86:0.01[alive] i386: 0.01..2.6.24-rc1 [folded into x86] x86_64: 2.5.5-pre1..2.6.24-rc1 [folded into x86] x86:2.6.24-rc1 [alive] alpha: 1.1.67 [alive] sparc: 1.1.77 [alive] sparc64:2.1.19..2.6.28 [folded into sparc] mips: 1.1.82 [alive] mips64: 2.3.48-pre2..2.6.0-test2 [folded into mips] powerpc:1.3.45 [alive] ppc:1.3.45..2.6.26 [folded into powerpc] ppc64: 2.5.5..2.6.15-rc1 [folded into powerpc] powerpc:2.6.15-rc1 [alive] m68k: 1.3.94 [alive] m68knommu: 2.5.46..2.6.38 [folded into m68k] arm:2.1.80 [alive] arm26: 2.5.71..2.6.23-rc2 [gone] arm64: 3.7-rc1 [alive][might eventually fold] sh: 2.3.16 [alive] sh64: 2.6.8-rc1..2.6.24 [folded into sh, nearly dead there] ia64: 2.3.43-pre1 [alive] s390: 2.3.99pre8 [alive] s390x: 2.5.0..2.5.67 [folded into s390] parisc: 2.4.0-test12[alive] cris: 2.5.0 [alive] um: 2.5.35 [alive] v850: 2.5.46..2.6.26 [gone] h8300: 2.5.68 [moderately responsive] m32r: 2.6.9-rc3 [alive] frv:2.6.11-rc1 [alive] xtensa: 2.6.13-rc1 [alive] avr32: 2.6.19-rc1 [alive] blackfin: 2.6.22-rc1 [alive] mn10300:2.6.25-rc1 [alive] microblaze: 2.6.30-rc2 [alive] score: 2.6.32-rc1 [abandoned][cloned off mips] tile: 2.6.36-rc1 [alive] unicore32: 2.6.39-rc1 [alive][cloned off arm] openrisc: 3.1-rc1 [alive] hexagon:3.2-rc1 [alive] c6x:3.3-rc1 [alive] arc:3.9-rc1 [alive] metag: 3.9-rc1 [alive] Frankly, I would've expected score and lefotvers of sh64 (aka sh5) to be the first against the wall - h8300 was a bit surprising... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Drop support for Renesas H8/300 architecture
On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 11:52:17AM +0800, Chen Gang F T wrote: extreme sample: let 'kernel code style' and 'gcc code style' in one file, that will make the code very ugly. gcc style will make any code very ugly, no matter what (if anything) else is in the same file... [digs out the ports history table] x86:0.01[alive] i386: 0.01..2.6.24-rc1 [folded into x86] x86_64: 2.5.5-pre1..2.6.24-rc1 [folded into x86] x86:2.6.24-rc1 [alive] alpha: 1.1.67 [alive] sparc: 1.1.77 [alive] sparc64:2.1.19..2.6.28 [folded into sparc] mips: 1.1.82 [alive] mips64: 2.3.48-pre2..2.6.0-test2 [folded into mips] powerpc:1.3.45 [alive] ppc:1.3.45..2.6.26 [folded into powerpc] ppc64: 2.5.5..2.6.15-rc1 [folded into powerpc] powerpc:2.6.15-rc1 [alive] m68k: 1.3.94 [alive] m68knommu: 2.5.46..2.6.38 [folded into m68k] arm:2.1.80 [alive] arm26: 2.5.71..2.6.23-rc2 [gone] arm64: 3.7-rc1 [alive][might eventually fold] sh: 2.3.16 [alive] sh64: 2.6.8-rc1..2.6.24 [folded into sh, nearly dead there] ia64: 2.3.43-pre1 [alive] s390: 2.3.99pre8 [alive] s390x: 2.5.0..2.5.67 [folded into s390] parisc: 2.4.0-test12[alive] cris: 2.5.0 [alive] um: 2.5.35 [alive] v850: 2.5.46..2.6.26 [gone] h8300: 2.5.68 [moderately responsive] m32r: 2.6.9-rc3 [alive] frv:2.6.11-rc1 [alive] xtensa: 2.6.13-rc1 [alive] avr32: 2.6.19-rc1 [alive] blackfin: 2.6.22-rc1 [alive] mn10300:2.6.25-rc1 [alive] microblaze: 2.6.30-rc2 [alive] score: 2.6.32-rc1 [abandoned][cloned off mips] tile: 2.6.36-rc1 [alive] unicore32: 2.6.39-rc1 [alive][cloned off arm] openrisc: 3.1-rc1 [alive] hexagon:3.2-rc1 [alive] c6x:3.3-rc1 [alive] arc:3.9-rc1 [alive] metag: 3.9-rc1 [alive] Frankly, I would've expected score and lefotvers of sh64 (aka sh5) to be the first against the wall - h8300 was a bit surprising... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Drop support for Renesas H8/300 architecture
On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 08:39:38PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 11:52:17AM +0800, Chen Gang F T wrote: extreme sample: let 'kernel code style' and 'gcc code style' in one file, that will make the code very ugly. gcc style will make any code very ugly, no matter what (if anything) else is in the same file... [digs out the ports history table] x86: 0.01[alive] i386: 0.01..2.6.24-rc1 [folded into x86] x86_64: 2.5.5-pre1..2.6.24-rc1 [folded into x86] x86:2.6.24-rc1 [alive] alpha:1.1.67 [alive] sparc:1.1.77 [alive] sparc64:2.1.19..2.6.28 [folded into sparc] mips: 1.1.82 [alive] mips64: 2.3.48-pre2..2.6.0-test2 [folded into mips] powerpc: 1.3.45 [alive] ppc:1.3.45..2.6.26 [folded into powerpc] ppc64: 2.5.5..2.6.15-rc1 [folded into powerpc] powerpc:2.6.15-rc1 [alive] m68k: 1.3.94 [alive] m68knommu: 2.5.46..2.6.38 [folded into m68k] arm: 2.1.80 [alive] arm26: 2.5.71..2.6.23-rc2 [gone] arm64: 3.7-rc1 [alive][might eventually fold] sh: 2.3.16 [alive] sh64: 2.6.8-rc1..2.6.24 [folded into sh, nearly dead there] ia64: 2.3.43-pre1 [alive] s390: 2.3.99pre8 [alive] s390x: 2.5.0..2.5.67 [folded into s390] parisc: 2.4.0-test12[alive] cris: 2.5.0 [alive] um: 2.5.35 [alive] v850: 2.5.46..2.6.26 [gone] h8300:2.5.68 [moderately responsive] m32r: 2.6.9-rc3 [alive] frv: 2.6.11-rc1 [alive] xtensa: 2.6.13-rc1 [alive] avr32:2.6.19-rc1 [alive] blackfin: 2.6.22-rc1 [alive] mn10300: 2.6.25-rc1 [alive] microblaze: 2.6.30-rc2 [alive] score:2.6.32-rc1 [abandoned][cloned off mips] tile: 2.6.36-rc1 [alive] unicore32:2.6.39-rc1 [alive][cloned off arm] openrisc: 3.1-rc1 [alive] hexagon: 3.2-rc1 [alive] c6x: 3.3-rc1 [alive] arc: 3.9-rc1 [alive] metag:3.9-rc1 [alive] Frankly, I would've expected score and lefotvers of sh64 (aka sh5) to be the first against the wall - h8300 was a bit surprising... Great summary. There seemed to be a consensus to remove h8300, at least so far and sufficiently enough for me to ask Stephen to add the removal branch to linux-next. We'll see if that triggers any further responses. With score, I am not entirely sure. I got one Ack for the removal, but on the other side the score maintainers came back and claimed they would still support it. We'll see if anything changes in practice. I am still not sure if I should ask for the removal branch to be added to linux-next. Frankly I thought I might jump the gun here more than with h8300. Either case, what to ultimately do with those two architectures will be up to the community to decide. Guenter -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Drop support for Renesas H8/300 architecture
Thank you for your valuable information: it will let kernel waste mails less, and also can save my time resources. On 09/04/2013 04:59 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote: On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 08:39:38PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 11:52:17AM +0800, Chen Gang F T wrote: extreme sample: let 'kernel code style' and 'gcc code style' in one file, that will make the code very ugly. gcc style will make any code very ugly, no matter what (if anything) else is in the same file... Hmm... for me, I don't check/judge the 'coding style' of different products, what I focus on is to follow the original product 'coding style'. e.g. Windows, gcc, Linux kernel, their 'coding styles' are quite different with each other. Originally I worked under Windows, I followed Windows coding style. Now I worked under Linux kernel, I follow Linux kernel coding style. I plan to make patch for gcc, I will follow gcc coding style. (hope this month I can, but I am not sure, I have no experience for gcc development). And excuse me, I will be silent during 2013-09-05 - 2013-09-20 (but can response mail). During these days, I will focus on gcc issues (wish can fix one), and also do some company's internal things. Thanks. [digs out the ports history table] x86: 0.01[alive] i386: 0.01..2.6.24-rc1 [folded into x86] x86_64: 2.5.5-pre1..2.6.24-rc1 [folded into x86] x86:2.6.24-rc1 [alive] alpha: 1.1.67 [alive] sparc: 1.1.77 [alive] sparc64:2.1.19..2.6.28 [folded into sparc] mips:1.1.82 [alive] mips64: 2.3.48-pre2..2.6.0-test2 [folded into mips] powerpc: 1.3.45 [alive] ppc:1.3.45..2.6.26 [folded into powerpc] ppc64: 2.5.5..2.6.15-rc1 [folded into powerpc] powerpc:2.6.15-rc1 [alive] m68k:1.3.94 [alive] m68knommu: 2.5.46..2.6.38 [folded into m68k] arm: 2.1.80 [alive] arm26: 2.5.71..2.6.23-rc2 [gone] arm64: 3.7-rc1 [alive][might eventually fold] sh: 2.3.16 [alive] sh64: 2.6.8-rc1..2.6.24 [folded into sh, nearly dead there] ia64:2.3.43-pre1 [alive] s390:2.3.99pre8 [alive] s390x: 2.5.0..2.5.67 [folded into s390] parisc: 2.4.0-test12[alive] cris:2.5.0 [alive] um: 2.5.35 [alive] v850:2.5.46..2.6.26 [gone] h8300: 2.5.68 [moderately responsive] m32r:2.6.9-rc3 [alive] frv: 2.6.11-rc1 [alive] xtensa: 2.6.13-rc1 [alive] avr32: 2.6.19-rc1 [alive] blackfin:2.6.22-rc1 [alive] mn10300: 2.6.25-rc1 [alive] microblaze: 2.6.30-rc2 [alive] score: 2.6.32-rc1 [abandoned][cloned off mips] tile:2.6.36-rc1 [alive] unicore32: 2.6.39-rc1 [alive][cloned off arm] openrisc:3.1-rc1 [alive] hexagon: 3.2-rc1 [alive] c6x: 3.3-rc1 [alive] arc: 3.9-rc1 [alive] metag: 3.9-rc1 [alive] Frankly, I would've expected score and lefotvers of sh64 (aka sh5) to be the first against the wall - h8300 was a bit surprising... Great summary. There seemed to be a consensus to remove h8300, at least so far and sufficiently enough for me to ask Stephen to add the removal branch to linux-next. We'll see if that triggers any further responses. With score, I am not entirely sure. I got one Ack for the removal, but on the other side the score maintainers came back and claimed they would still support it. We'll see if anything changes in practice. I am still not sure if I should ask for the removal branch to be added to linux-next. Frankly I thought I might jump the gun here more than with h8300. Either case, what to ultimately do with those two architectures will be up to the community to decide. Guenter Thanks again. -- Chen Gang -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Drop support for Renesas H8/300 architecture
On 09/03/2013 11:26 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On 09/02/2013 07:53 PM, Chen Gang F T wrote: >> Hello Guenter Roeck: >> >> >> I don't care about whether I am in cc mailing list, but at least, >> please help confirm 2 things: >> >>Is what I had done for h8300 just making wastes and noisy in kernel and >> related sub-system mailing list ? >> >>and is the disccusion about h8300 between us also wastes and noisy in >> kernel mailing list ? >> > > It raised my awareness of the status of h8300 maintenance, > so I would not see it as noise or waste. I might have suggested > a different target for your efforts, but that is your choice to make, > not mine. > OK, thank you for your confirmation, I plan to scan all architectures one by one with allmodconfig. Hmm... if suitable, next, when I focus one of architectures, I also cc to you, if it can be removed, please let me know in time, so can avoid sending waste mails to mailing list. I plan to try one of architectures within arc, hexagon, and metag. I will begin at 2013-09-20 (or later), if some (or all) of them can be removed, please let me know, thanks. > On the code review side, I had suggested that you should not add new > ifdefs into code, much less unnecessary ones. Your counter-argument > was that you wanted to follow the existing coding style in the file > in question. To me, that argument is along the line of "the coding > style in this file is bad, let's do more of it". Hmm... in fact, I will not say whether the code style is good or bad. I mainly focus on to try to avoid multiple code styles within one file. extreme sample: let 'kernel code style' and 'gcc code style' in one file, that will make the code very ugly. > That doesn't make much sense to me, so I did not bother to respond. > Setting that aside, it is not up to me to approve or reject your patches. > Whoever does that would be the one you have to convince. > OK, I can understand, and now it seems it can be canceled, since h8300 has been removed. > Guenter > Thanks. -- Chen Gang -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Drop support for Renesas H8/300 architecture
On 09/02/2013 07:53 PM, Chen Gang F T wrote: > Hello Guenter Roeck: > > > I don't care about whether I am in cc mailing list, but at least, > please help confirm 2 things: > >Is what I had done for h8300 just making wastes and noisy in kernel and > related sub-system mailing list ? > >and is the disccusion about h8300 between us also wastes and noisy in > kernel mailing list ? > It raised my awareness of the status of h8300 maintenance, so I would not see it as noise or waste. I might have suggested a different target for your efforts, but that is your choice to make, not mine. On the code review side, I had suggested that you should not add new ifdefs into code, much less unnecessary ones. Your counter-argument was that you wanted to follow the existing coding style in the file in question. To me, that argument is along the line of "the coding style in this file is bad, let's do more of it". That doesn't make much sense to me, so I did not bother to respond. Setting that aside, it is not up to me to approve or reject your patches. Whoever does that would be the one you have to convince. Guenter -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Drop support for Renesas H8/300 architecture
Hello Guenter Roeck: I don't care about whether I am in cc mailing list, but at least, please help confirm 2 things: Is what I had done for h8300 just making wastes and noisy in kernel and related sub-system mailing list ? and is the disccusion about h8300 between us also wastes and noisy in kernel mailing list ? And also I have to make an apologize to kernel and other related sub system mailing list: some of patches about h8300 which I have sent in 2013-09-02 are really wastes (and I wasted my time resource for it, too). the excuse (not reason) is I do not know about Guenter Roeck has sent this patch (I am not in this cc list, so I find it one day delay). BTW: I also add some another related members in cc mailing list to let them know about some of suspending thread about h8300 (which waiting for allmodconfig finish) can be canceled. Thanks. On 08/31/2013 07:51 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote: > H8/300 has been dead for several years, the kernel for it has > not compiled for ages, and recent versions of gcc for it are broken. > It is time to drop support for it. > > Yes, I understand it is not that simple to drop an architecture, > and it may need some discussion, but someone has to put a stake > into the ground. Keeping a virtually dead architecture on life support > takes resources which are better spent elsewhere. > > v2: > - s/Renesys/Renesas/g > - Found and removed more architecture specific code in fs/minix > and in smc9194 driver > - Added explicit Cc: for h8300 maintainer > - Added subsystem maintainer Acks > > > Guenter Roeck (8): > Drop support for Renesas H8/300 (h8300) architecture > ide: Drop H8/300 driver > net/ethernet: smsc9194: Drop conditional code for H8/300 > net/ethernet: Drop H8/300 Ethernet driver > watchdog: Drop references to H8300 architecture > Drop MAINTAINERS entry for H8/300 > Drop remaining references to H8/300 architecture > fs/minix: Drop dependency on H8300 > > Documentation/scheduler/sched-arch.txt |5 - > MAINTAINERS |8 - > arch/h8300/Kconfig | 109 > arch/h8300/Kconfig.cpu | 171 -- > arch/h8300/Kconfig.debug | 68 --- > arch/h8300/Kconfig.ide | 44 -- > arch/h8300/Makefile | 71 --- > arch/h8300/README| 38 -- > arch/h8300/boot/Makefile | 22 - > arch/h8300/boot/compressed/Makefile | 37 -- > arch/h8300/boot/compressed/head.S| 47 -- > arch/h8300/boot/compressed/misc.c| 180 -- > arch/h8300/boot/compressed/vmlinux.lds | 32 - > arch/h8300/boot/compressed/vmlinux.scr |9 - > arch/h8300/defconfig | 42 -- > arch/h8300/include/asm/Kbuild|8 - > arch/h8300/include/asm/asm-offsets.h |1 - > arch/h8300/include/asm/atomic.h | 146 - > arch/h8300/include/asm/barrier.h | 29 - > arch/h8300/include/asm/bitops.h | 211 --- > arch/h8300/include/asm/bootinfo.h|2 - > arch/h8300/include/asm/bug.h | 12 - > arch/h8300/include/asm/bugs.h| 16 - > arch/h8300/include/asm/cache.h | 13 - > arch/h8300/include/asm/cachectl.h| 14 - > arch/h8300/include/asm/cacheflush.h | 40 -- > arch/h8300/include/asm/checksum.h| 102 > arch/h8300/include/asm/cmpxchg.h | 60 -- > arch/h8300/include/asm/cputime.h |6 - > arch/h8300/include/asm/current.h | 25 - > arch/h8300/include/asm/dbg.h |2 - > arch/h8300/include/asm/delay.h | 38 -- > arch/h8300/include/asm/device.h |7 - > arch/h8300/include/asm/div64.h |1 - > arch/h8300/include/asm/dma.h | 15 - > arch/h8300/include/asm/elf.h | 101 > arch/h8300/include/asm/emergency-restart.h |6 - > arch/h8300/include/asm/fb.h | 12 - > arch/h8300/include/asm/flat.h| 26 - > arch/h8300/include/asm/fpu.h |1 - > arch/h8300/include/asm/ftrace.h |1 - > arch/h8300/include/asm/futex.h |6 - > arch/h8300/include/asm/gpio-internal.h | 52 -- > arch/h8300/include/asm/hardirq.h | 19 - > arch/h8300/include/asm/hw_irq.h |1 - > arch/h8300/include/asm/io.h | 358 --- > arch/h8300/include/asm/irq.h | 49 -- >
Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Drop support for Renesas H8/300 architecture
Hello Guenter Roeck: I don't care about whether I am in cc mailing list, but at least, please help confirm 2 things: Is what I had done for h8300 just making wastes and noisy in kernel and related sub-system mailing list ? and is the disccusion about h8300 between us also wastes and noisy in kernel mailing list ? And also I have to make an apologize to kernel and other related sub system mailing list: some of patches about h8300 which I have sent in 2013-09-02 are really wastes (and I wasted my time resource for it, too). the excuse (not reason) is I do not know about Guenter Roeck has sent this patch (I am not in this cc list, so I find it one day delay). BTW: I also add some another related members in cc mailing list to let them know about some of suspending thread about h8300 (which waiting for allmodconfig finish) can be canceled. Thanks. On 08/31/2013 07:51 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote: H8/300 has been dead for several years, the kernel for it has not compiled for ages, and recent versions of gcc for it are broken. It is time to drop support for it. Yes, I understand it is not that simple to drop an architecture, and it may need some discussion, but someone has to put a stake into the ground. Keeping a virtually dead architecture on life support takes resources which are better spent elsewhere. v2: - s/Renesys/Renesas/g - Found and removed more architecture specific code in fs/minix and in smc9194 driver - Added explicit Cc: for h8300 maintainer - Added subsystem maintainer Acks Guenter Roeck (8): Drop support for Renesas H8/300 (h8300) architecture ide: Drop H8/300 driver net/ethernet: smsc9194: Drop conditional code for H8/300 net/ethernet: Drop H8/300 Ethernet driver watchdog: Drop references to H8300 architecture Drop MAINTAINERS entry for H8/300 Drop remaining references to H8/300 architecture fs/minix: Drop dependency on H8300 Documentation/scheduler/sched-arch.txt |5 - MAINTAINERS |8 - arch/h8300/Kconfig | 109 arch/h8300/Kconfig.cpu | 171 -- arch/h8300/Kconfig.debug | 68 --- arch/h8300/Kconfig.ide | 44 -- arch/h8300/Makefile | 71 --- arch/h8300/README| 38 -- arch/h8300/boot/Makefile | 22 - arch/h8300/boot/compressed/Makefile | 37 -- arch/h8300/boot/compressed/head.S| 47 -- arch/h8300/boot/compressed/misc.c| 180 -- arch/h8300/boot/compressed/vmlinux.lds | 32 - arch/h8300/boot/compressed/vmlinux.scr |9 - arch/h8300/defconfig | 42 -- arch/h8300/include/asm/Kbuild|8 - arch/h8300/include/asm/asm-offsets.h |1 - arch/h8300/include/asm/atomic.h | 146 - arch/h8300/include/asm/barrier.h | 29 - arch/h8300/include/asm/bitops.h | 211 --- arch/h8300/include/asm/bootinfo.h|2 - arch/h8300/include/asm/bug.h | 12 - arch/h8300/include/asm/bugs.h| 16 - arch/h8300/include/asm/cache.h | 13 - arch/h8300/include/asm/cachectl.h| 14 - arch/h8300/include/asm/cacheflush.h | 40 -- arch/h8300/include/asm/checksum.h| 102 arch/h8300/include/asm/cmpxchg.h | 60 -- arch/h8300/include/asm/cputime.h |6 - arch/h8300/include/asm/current.h | 25 - arch/h8300/include/asm/dbg.h |2 - arch/h8300/include/asm/delay.h | 38 -- arch/h8300/include/asm/device.h |7 - arch/h8300/include/asm/div64.h |1 - arch/h8300/include/asm/dma.h | 15 - arch/h8300/include/asm/elf.h | 101 arch/h8300/include/asm/emergency-restart.h |6 - arch/h8300/include/asm/fb.h | 12 - arch/h8300/include/asm/flat.h| 26 - arch/h8300/include/asm/fpu.h |1 - arch/h8300/include/asm/ftrace.h |1 - arch/h8300/include/asm/futex.h |6 - arch/h8300/include/asm/gpio-internal.h | 52 -- arch/h8300/include/asm/hardirq.h | 19 - arch/h8300/include/asm/hw_irq.h |1 - arch/h8300/include/asm/io.h | 358 --- arch/h8300/include/asm/irq.h | 49 -- arch/h8300/include/asm/irq_regs.h|1 -
Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Drop support for Renesas H8/300 architecture
On 09/02/2013 07:53 PM, Chen Gang F T wrote: Hello Guenter Roeck: I don't care about whether I am in cc mailing list, but at least, please help confirm 2 things: Is what I had done for h8300 just making wastes and noisy in kernel and related sub-system mailing list ? and is the disccusion about h8300 between us also wastes and noisy in kernel mailing list ? It raised my awareness of the status of h8300 maintenance, so I would not see it as noise or waste. I might have suggested a different target for your efforts, but that is your choice to make, not mine. On the code review side, I had suggested that you should not add new ifdefs into code, much less unnecessary ones. Your counter-argument was that you wanted to follow the existing coding style in the file in question. To me, that argument is along the line of the coding style in this file is bad, let's do more of it. That doesn't make much sense to me, so I did not bother to respond. Setting that aside, it is not up to me to approve or reject your patches. Whoever does that would be the one you have to convince. Guenter -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Drop support for Renesas H8/300 architecture
On 09/03/2013 11:26 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote: On 09/02/2013 07:53 PM, Chen Gang F T wrote: Hello Guenter Roeck: I don't care about whether I am in cc mailing list, but at least, please help confirm 2 things: Is what I had done for h8300 just making wastes and noisy in kernel and related sub-system mailing list ? and is the disccusion about h8300 between us also wastes and noisy in kernel mailing list ? It raised my awareness of the status of h8300 maintenance, so I would not see it as noise or waste. I might have suggested a different target for your efforts, but that is your choice to make, not mine. OK, thank you for your confirmation, I plan to scan all architectures one by one with allmodconfig. Hmm... if suitable, next, when I focus one of architectures, I also cc to you, if it can be removed, please let me know in time, so can avoid sending waste mails to mailing list. I plan to try one of architectures within arc, hexagon, and metag. I will begin at 2013-09-20 (or later), if some (or all) of them can be removed, please let me know, thanks. On the code review side, I had suggested that you should not add new ifdefs into code, much less unnecessary ones. Your counter-argument was that you wanted to follow the existing coding style in the file in question. To me, that argument is along the line of the coding style in this file is bad, let's do more of it. Hmm... in fact, I will not say whether the code style is good or bad. I mainly focus on to try to avoid multiple code styles within one file. extreme sample: let 'kernel code style' and 'gcc code style' in one file, that will make the code very ugly. That doesn't make much sense to me, so I did not bother to respond. Setting that aside, it is not up to me to approve or reject your patches. Whoever does that would be the one you have to convince. OK, I can understand, and now it seems it can be canceled, since h8300 has been removed. Guenter Thanks. -- Chen Gang -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[PATCH v2 0/8] Drop support for Renesas H8/300 architecture
H8/300 has been dead for several years, the kernel for it has not compiled for ages, and recent versions of gcc for it are broken. It is time to drop support for it. Yes, I understand it is not that simple to drop an architecture, and it may need some discussion, but someone has to put a stake into the ground. Keeping a virtually dead architecture on life support takes resources which are better spent elsewhere. v2: - s/Renesys/Renesas/g - Found and removed more architecture specific code in fs/minix and in smc9194 driver - Added explicit Cc: for h8300 maintainer - Added subsystem maintainer Acks Guenter Roeck (8): Drop support for Renesas H8/300 (h8300) architecture ide: Drop H8/300 driver net/ethernet: smsc9194: Drop conditional code for H8/300 net/ethernet: Drop H8/300 Ethernet driver watchdog: Drop references to H8300 architecture Drop MAINTAINERS entry for H8/300 Drop remaining references to H8/300 architecture fs/minix: Drop dependency on H8300 Documentation/scheduler/sched-arch.txt |5 - MAINTAINERS |8 - arch/h8300/Kconfig | 109 arch/h8300/Kconfig.cpu | 171 -- arch/h8300/Kconfig.debug | 68 --- arch/h8300/Kconfig.ide | 44 -- arch/h8300/Makefile | 71 --- arch/h8300/README| 38 -- arch/h8300/boot/Makefile | 22 - arch/h8300/boot/compressed/Makefile | 37 -- arch/h8300/boot/compressed/head.S| 47 -- arch/h8300/boot/compressed/misc.c| 180 -- arch/h8300/boot/compressed/vmlinux.lds | 32 - arch/h8300/boot/compressed/vmlinux.scr |9 - arch/h8300/defconfig | 42 -- arch/h8300/include/asm/Kbuild|8 - arch/h8300/include/asm/asm-offsets.h |1 - arch/h8300/include/asm/atomic.h | 146 - arch/h8300/include/asm/barrier.h | 29 - arch/h8300/include/asm/bitops.h | 211 --- arch/h8300/include/asm/bootinfo.h|2 - arch/h8300/include/asm/bug.h | 12 - arch/h8300/include/asm/bugs.h| 16 - arch/h8300/include/asm/cache.h | 13 - arch/h8300/include/asm/cachectl.h| 14 - arch/h8300/include/asm/cacheflush.h | 40 -- arch/h8300/include/asm/checksum.h| 102 arch/h8300/include/asm/cmpxchg.h | 60 -- arch/h8300/include/asm/cputime.h |6 - arch/h8300/include/asm/current.h | 25 - arch/h8300/include/asm/dbg.h |2 - arch/h8300/include/asm/delay.h | 38 -- arch/h8300/include/asm/device.h |7 - arch/h8300/include/asm/div64.h |1 - arch/h8300/include/asm/dma.h | 15 - arch/h8300/include/asm/elf.h | 101 arch/h8300/include/asm/emergency-restart.h |6 - arch/h8300/include/asm/fb.h | 12 - arch/h8300/include/asm/flat.h| 26 - arch/h8300/include/asm/fpu.h |1 - arch/h8300/include/asm/ftrace.h |1 - arch/h8300/include/asm/futex.h |6 - arch/h8300/include/asm/gpio-internal.h | 52 -- arch/h8300/include/asm/hardirq.h | 19 - arch/h8300/include/asm/hw_irq.h |1 - arch/h8300/include/asm/io.h | 358 --- arch/h8300/include/asm/irq.h | 49 -- arch/h8300/include/asm/irq_regs.h|1 - arch/h8300/include/asm/irqflags.h| 43 -- arch/h8300/include/asm/kdebug.h |1 - arch/h8300/include/asm/kmap_types.h |6 - arch/h8300/include/asm/local.h |6 - arch/h8300/include/asm/local64.h |1 - arch/h8300/include/asm/mc146818rtc.h |9 - arch/h8300/include/asm/mmu_context.h | 32 - arch/h8300/include/asm/mutex.h |9 - arch/h8300/include/asm/page.h| 78 --- arch/h8300/include/asm/page_offset.h |3 - arch/h8300/include/asm/param.h |9 - arch/h8300/include/asm/pci.h | 19 - arch/h8300/include/asm/percpu.h |6 - arch/h8300/include/asm/pgalloc.h |8 - arch/h8300/include/asm/pgtable.h | 73 --- arch/h8300/include/asm/processor.h | 139 - arch/h8300/include/asm/ptrace.h | 33 --
[PATCH v2 0/8] Drop support for Renesas H8/300 architecture
H8/300 has been dead for several years, the kernel for it has not compiled for ages, and recent versions of gcc for it are broken. It is time to drop support for it. Yes, I understand it is not that simple to drop an architecture, and it may need some discussion, but someone has to put a stake into the ground. Keeping a virtually dead architecture on life support takes resources which are better spent elsewhere. v2: - s/Renesys/Renesas/g - Found and removed more architecture specific code in fs/minix and in smc9194 driver - Added explicit Cc: for h8300 maintainer - Added subsystem maintainer Acks Guenter Roeck (8): Drop support for Renesas H8/300 (h8300) architecture ide: Drop H8/300 driver net/ethernet: smsc9194: Drop conditional code for H8/300 net/ethernet: Drop H8/300 Ethernet driver watchdog: Drop references to H8300 architecture Drop MAINTAINERS entry for H8/300 Drop remaining references to H8/300 architecture fs/minix: Drop dependency on H8300 Documentation/scheduler/sched-arch.txt |5 - MAINTAINERS |8 - arch/h8300/Kconfig | 109 arch/h8300/Kconfig.cpu | 171 -- arch/h8300/Kconfig.debug | 68 --- arch/h8300/Kconfig.ide | 44 -- arch/h8300/Makefile | 71 --- arch/h8300/README| 38 -- arch/h8300/boot/Makefile | 22 - arch/h8300/boot/compressed/Makefile | 37 -- arch/h8300/boot/compressed/head.S| 47 -- arch/h8300/boot/compressed/misc.c| 180 -- arch/h8300/boot/compressed/vmlinux.lds | 32 - arch/h8300/boot/compressed/vmlinux.scr |9 - arch/h8300/defconfig | 42 -- arch/h8300/include/asm/Kbuild|8 - arch/h8300/include/asm/asm-offsets.h |1 - arch/h8300/include/asm/atomic.h | 146 - arch/h8300/include/asm/barrier.h | 29 - arch/h8300/include/asm/bitops.h | 211 --- arch/h8300/include/asm/bootinfo.h|2 - arch/h8300/include/asm/bug.h | 12 - arch/h8300/include/asm/bugs.h| 16 - arch/h8300/include/asm/cache.h | 13 - arch/h8300/include/asm/cachectl.h| 14 - arch/h8300/include/asm/cacheflush.h | 40 -- arch/h8300/include/asm/checksum.h| 102 arch/h8300/include/asm/cmpxchg.h | 60 -- arch/h8300/include/asm/cputime.h |6 - arch/h8300/include/asm/current.h | 25 - arch/h8300/include/asm/dbg.h |2 - arch/h8300/include/asm/delay.h | 38 -- arch/h8300/include/asm/device.h |7 - arch/h8300/include/asm/div64.h |1 - arch/h8300/include/asm/dma.h | 15 - arch/h8300/include/asm/elf.h | 101 arch/h8300/include/asm/emergency-restart.h |6 - arch/h8300/include/asm/fb.h | 12 - arch/h8300/include/asm/flat.h| 26 - arch/h8300/include/asm/fpu.h |1 - arch/h8300/include/asm/ftrace.h |1 - arch/h8300/include/asm/futex.h |6 - arch/h8300/include/asm/gpio-internal.h | 52 -- arch/h8300/include/asm/hardirq.h | 19 - arch/h8300/include/asm/hw_irq.h |1 - arch/h8300/include/asm/io.h | 358 --- arch/h8300/include/asm/irq.h | 49 -- arch/h8300/include/asm/irq_regs.h|1 - arch/h8300/include/asm/irqflags.h| 43 -- arch/h8300/include/asm/kdebug.h |1 - arch/h8300/include/asm/kmap_types.h |6 - arch/h8300/include/asm/local.h |6 - arch/h8300/include/asm/local64.h |1 - arch/h8300/include/asm/mc146818rtc.h |9 - arch/h8300/include/asm/mmu_context.h | 32 - arch/h8300/include/asm/mutex.h |9 - arch/h8300/include/asm/page.h| 78 --- arch/h8300/include/asm/page_offset.h |3 - arch/h8300/include/asm/param.h |9 - arch/h8300/include/asm/pci.h | 19 - arch/h8300/include/asm/percpu.h |6 - arch/h8300/include/asm/pgalloc.h |8 - arch/h8300/include/asm/pgtable.h | 73 --- arch/h8300/include/asm/processor.h | 139 - arch/h8300/include/asm/ptrace.h | 33 --
