On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 10:27:55PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

On Monday 29 October 2012, Richard Cochran wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 12:01:17AM +0200, Krzysztof Halasa wrote:

quoted

Don't get me wrong. If I had time for this it could be different.
Unfortunately IXP4xx is a legacy arch, and for me it's simply a hobby at
this point. Given the raised barriers to participate, probably aimed at
paid maintainers, I have to quit doing this.

BTW since Imre has probably even much less time, it would be a good time
to find someone to maintain IXP4xx code. I will be publishing (from time
to time) my tree (I'm using the hw myself), so even simple
cherry-picking would probably make some sense.

So if no one else wants to do this, then I am willing to look after
the IXP code. I think that I do have the time for it.

Thanks for the offer! 

Yes, thank you!

Jason Cooper was also volunteering to help out with this, and even we can't
convince Krzysztof to continue doing it, there is also Imre who is officially
listed as maintainer for IXP4xx and who has not commented on this. As Krzysztof
mentions, he probably doesn't have much time for it, but I'd like to give
him the chance to comment as well.

Agreed.

I'm sure we can find some solution between the four of you. Right now, I think
we should focus on getting the bug fixes from Krzysztof's tree into mainline
and the stable kernels where applicable, and then establish a better working
mode for the future kernels.

We also need to keep an eye on the big picture.  If we are going to
keep/maintain ixp4xx in the kernel, there are some things which need to
be done.  The drivers need moved to drivers/, platform headers need
moved to platform_data/, and we may as well add devicetree bindings
while we're moving things around.

Making ixp4xx compatible with multiplatform zImage would probably help
out the embedded distros as well.

thx,

Jason.