[U-Boot] [PATCH 00/93] dm: Move towards completing CONFIG_BLK migration

[Marek Vasut]

On 11/20/2018 02:42 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 02:40:43PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 11/20/2018 02:37 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 01:42:15PM +0100, Soeren Moch wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 19.11.18 16:52, Simon Glass wrote:
>>>>> All boards should now be migrated to use CONFIG_BLK. This series removes
>>>>> those with build problems using this option.
>>>>>
>>>>> If maintainers want to keep these boards in they should send a patch in
>>>>> the next week or two. Otherwise the board will be removed in the next
>>>>> release, and will need to be added and re-reviewed later.
>>>> Fabio, Stefano,
>>>>
>>>> it seems (almost?) all i.mx6 boards should be removed within two weeks.
>>>> But would it not make more sense to convert the reference boards first
>>>> (mx6sabresd
>>>> in my case for tbs2910), and let hobbyist maintainers like me take this
>>>> as example for
>>>> their own modifications?
>>>
>>> So, I replied to the main thread earlier but no, we're not going to drop
>>> everything in 2 weeks, especially since there's a lot of false positives
>>> in this series.
>>>
>>>> Simon, Tom,
>>>>
>>>> is this really the usual u-boot working style to remove about hundred
>>>> boards within
>>>> two weeks without prior warning? As hobbyist board maintainer I try to
>>>> follow
>>>> new developments, and more than once I fixed up regressions introduced
>>>> by others
>>>> in general code.
>>>> But I cannot follow all development details without any heads-up. And
>>>> even the
>>>> NXP folks seem to be surprised about this.
>>>>
>>>> All problems with this transition seem to be located around usbstorage
>>>> and sata.
>>>> This is for sure not really very board specific. Is there any migration
>>>> guide, or
>>>> examples how other SoC architectures did this conversion?
>>>
>>> I'll admit this hasn't been our best notification.  But, the deadline
>>> was discussed about a year ago (and then no, I didn't get a build-time
>>> warning in).  Then around v2018.05 I said it wasn't going to be a
>>> removal type problem yet as we had a lot of boards to fixup still, and
>>> repeated that at v2018.07.  That did lead to a lot of things getting
>>> addressed.  But yes, we still have some large areas that after a few
>>> years still have not been converted, and that puts me in a hard spot
>>> too.
>>
>> Build time warning for a year would be good ?
> 
> A year for this?  No.  New deadlines?  That's not too far off from what
> we've done historically, so yes.

Give people some sort of breathing space to get the conversion done.
Stressing people out by arbitrary deadlines will lead nowhere.

>> Maybe we need some generic Makefile macro to set those up.
> 
> It would be nice, yes.  I think the problem here is (or, was) the
> complex set of options that didn't work.

The problem was many people didn't know about the conversion deadline or
simply forgot. And reminding them with a 100-patch series removing half
of the boards is like splashing icy water bucket in their sleeping faces.

-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut