On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Segher Boessenkool <seg...@kernel.crashing.org> wrote: > [I proposed removing RIOS support, since it heavily gets in the way > for my project exposing the XER[CA] flag]. > >> My argument is simply this, sorry if it wasn't clear in the last >> email, bottom line up front: >> - It can just as easily be removed in the future if it is broken for >> more than one release rather than evicting support. > > I can guarantee you that the changes I am trying to make _will_ break > RIOS support. RIOS handles the carry flag quite differently from > PowerPC and Power Architecture, and I have no way to test RIOS either. > Since there is no significant community using these chips anymore, > removing RIOS support seemed like the best course of action. > >> - It shouldn't add unwieldy maintenance overhead. > > It already HAS been unwieldy maintenance overhead for years. > >> The old stuff can >> be walled off, conditionally built, and otherwise removed from the >> main focus. > > You obviously haven't looked at the code in detail, if you think this. > >> - The code is already written and just needs a maintainer. >> - I have the hardware and desire to maintain it. > > Feel free to split off a new backend then. The current intertwined > mess cannot be maintained properly. > > > Segher >
Hi Segher, David explained some of his points in an off-list email. For whatever it's worth I withdraw my objections. Per David and your suggestion, I will attempt to import the older back end code in my own private tree as newer front ends become desirable for building common applications. I don't think this is ideal but it is clear there is mutual exclusion between the work you need to do (which has greater impact) and my limited hobby interests. Although my usage is impractical and merely for fun, the current back ends seem intuitively fragile. By being vertically intertwined in a giant c file to the OS and species of arch, I can't help but feel this may cause continued headaches in the future. There may be more legitimate reasons for supporting older platforms, especially with heavy embedded use of archs with vastly different species like mips, ppc, and i386. Of course, this may be well known (I'm sure there is historical background) and I have no solution to offer. Regards, Kevin Bowling
