[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5693ECF8.9020408@hurleysoftware.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 09:57:12 -0800
From: Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>
To: Greg Ungerer <gerg@...inux.org>,
One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc: Linux/m68k <linux-m68k@...r.kernel.org>,
Frederik Völkel <frederik.voelkel@....de>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"linux-serial@...r.kernel.org" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@...cs.fau.de, Lukas Braun <lukas.braun@....de>,
uClinux development list <uclinux-dev@...inux.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] serial: Remove 68328 driver
On 01/04/2016 03:10 AM, Greg Ungerer wrote:
> On 04/01/16 20:30, One Thousand Gnomes wrote:
>> On Mon, 4 Jan 2016 15:03:50 +1000
>> Greg Ungerer <gregungerer@...tnet.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>> If 68328serial.c is removed is there any point keeping the
>>> architecture support for 68328 platforms?
>>>
>>> The 68328serial.c provides pretty much the only type of console
>>> that can be used on these devices. They are largely useless
>>> without this
>>
>> Probably we should - unless someone wants to stand up and say "actually
>> I'm using this with current kernels, need it, and I'll maintain it"
>>
>> Somehow I doubt anyone is.
>
> Yep, I suspect you are right.
> I can't even remember the last time a patch or improvement
> for 68328 came past me. Same goes for 68360 cpu/platform
> as well.
And none of it builds (and there's no build coverage in arch/m68k/configs)
Regards,
Peter Hurley
Powered by blists - more mailing lists