On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 05:58:52PM +0200, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:

On 12.08.2020 15:31, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 03:11:41PM +0200, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:

quoted

On 12.08.2020 13:28, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 12:46 PM Sylwester Nawrocki
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 12.08.2020 11:14, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

I see two board files (and no DT) instantiate the camif device:
NexVision Nexcoder 2440 and the FriendlyARM mini2440.

Can you say whether the camif on those would actually work
at all without your patch? If not, we know that there are no
users of that driver and could either drop it completely or move
it to staging for a release or two.

Without additional patches the camif will not work, the driver 
needs an instance of struct s3c_camif_plat_data which specifies
what image sensor is attached.

I think we can drop the driver, together with the s3c_camif_device
platform device definitions. It can always be added again if anyone
ever needs it or converts the platform to DT.

Since the header was in /include/media I assumed there might be some
user-space tools using it. But if it is not the case, I'll drop the code
then.

That's a kernel internal header, only for board files, it should really 
have been added to include/linux/platform_data.
  

quoted

quoted

IMO all non-DT code in arch/arm/mach-s3c24xx is a candidate for
removal, it just adds to the maintenance effort and I seriously
doubt there are now any users of it.

That is quite tricky... I really do not know whether there are any real
world users of S3C24xx and S3C64xx platforms. Evalkits are mostly not
available for buying so I do not expect new designs. However still
existing ones might be somewhere... Few years ago, back in Samsung, I
mentioned removing them. That time I think Marek or you Sylwester, said
that there are industrial applications using S3C24xx. I believe, why
not. The trouble is - how to find such users? How to get in touch for
testing or at least for bug reports if something is broken?

I believe if there any such applications of the S3C24XX SoCs still existing 
somewhere their long term support doesn't include updating to new kernels. 
I used to keep a running S3C2440 SoC based board just for the purpose of
testing patches touching the common code, but I stopped it, I think it is
not worth to waste time and health on it any more. For example support for 
the OSELAS.BSP-Pengutronix-Mini2440 BSP I used for tests ended 5 years ago
[1].

quoted

Or even more important - is it worth to spend effort and time on this?
If there is no single production system using recent Linux kernel, the
answer should be negative...

I suspect nobody cares about that code (non-DT s3c24xx) any more for other
than sentimental reasons.

I'll start then with S3C camif driver. :) I guess
drivers/media/platform/s3c-camif/ still should be left?

Best regards,
Krzysztof


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel