linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/10] ARM: pxa: use software nodes/properties for GPIOs

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <5d028f7f-a884-4983-ae8a-9b6b42e0ac4d@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2024 09:34:49 +0200
From: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>
To: "Dmitry Torokhov" <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Cc: "Haojian Zhuang" <haojian.zhuang@...il.com>,
 "Daniel Mack" <daniel@...que.org>, "Robert Jarzmik" <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr>,
 "Linus Walleij" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, soc@...nel.org,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] ARM: pxa: use software nodes/properties for GPIOs

On Fri, Jun 28, 2024, at 23:44, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> I would like to eventually switch everything to the software
> nodes/property entries. The GPIO lookup tables were introduced before we
> had software nodes and were really convenient way to describe GPIOs on
> non-ACPI non-DT boards. However now that we have software
> nodes/properties we can move away from both custom platform data and
> lookup tables in the board code and remove platform data support from
> the drivers, unifying the driver behavior.

Right, makes sense.

> I am not in any rush with this, so if some boards are on a cutting block
> I am happy to wait. I started poking at Spitz and the rest of mach-pxa
> because Linus W sent out a patch to ads7846 ;) and I also remembered
> that you already dropped bunch of PXA boards that were no longer
> relevant so I assumed spitz and gumstix still have some use.
>
> Could you tell me which ones are likely to stay vs ones that might go? I
> think arch/arm/mach-s3c/mach-crag* is staying? jornada720?

I think in the long run all of them will either get removed
or converted to DT, though it looks like the DT conversion has
not picked up for anything other than ep93xx.

For the timeline, I need to ask the same people again that
wanted the board files to stay two years ago. omap1 might be
a good one to prioritize for software nodes, as that likely
still has users and it would help getting closer to a DT
version.

     Arnd