[U-Boot] [PATCH] ARM: uniphier: drop UniPhier specific SMP code

[Tom Rini]

On Sat, Nov 07, 2015 at 01:12:14AM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> 2015-11-06 22:46 GMT+09:00 Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com>:
> > On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 10:16:30PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> >
> >> The latest Linux can directly handle SMP operations for UniPhier SoCs
> >> without any help of U-boot.  Drop the relevant code from U-boot.
> >>
> >> See commit b1e4006aeda8c8784029de17d47987c21ea75f6d ("ARM: uniphier:
> >> rework SMP operations to use trampoline code") in Linux Kernel.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro at socionext.com>
> >
> > So my question for you is how much of a concern is running older kernels
> > and newer U-Boots on these platforms?  I know that for example we
> > couldn't do something like that in "beagle" land, and for Allwinner
> > platforms we still have ways of making the older but most featureful
> > kernels work.
> 
> 
> Good question.
> 
> Socionext (and my former company, Panasonic) tended to
> modify source code locally (ugly hacks here and there) and never tried
> to push patches to the upstream.
> 
> I started the kernel upstreaming this year,
> and the company changed the mind and stared to realize its importance,
> but it is under way.
> 
> The mainline kernel requires some more extra patches that have not
> been upstreamed yet.
> 
> So, our customers cannot do anything with the mainline kernel alone.
> They are supposed to use software stacks released from us.
> 
> So, the combination of the older kernels + newer U-boot does not matter.
> The older kernels were not working in the first place.

Thanks!

Reviewed-by: Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com>

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20151108/a52dc904/attachment.sig>