Re: [PATCH 5/7] openrisc: Support both old (or32) and new (or1k) toolchain

[Jonas Bonn]

On 09/19/2016 04:04 PM, Stafford Horne wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Sep 2016, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>
> > On 09/19/2016 02:11 AM, Stafford Horne wrote:
> > >  On Mon, 19 Sep 2016, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > >
> > > >  On 09/18/2016 11:02 PM, Stafford Horne wrote:
> > > > > > > > >   On Sun, 18 Sep 2016, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > > > > > >   Tested-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > >   If you plan to handle openrisc going forward, it would be 
> > > great > > > >   if you > could
> > > > > >   consider updating MAINTAINERS. The web site and git 
> > > repository have > > >   been > unreachable
> > > > > >   for a long time.
> > > > > > >   Thank you,
> > > > >   Updating maintainers was kind of on my plans, but I figured I 
> > > need to
> > > > >   prove that I kind of know what I am doing.
> > > > > > >  The alternative would be to mark it as Orphaned. Which, for 
> > > all >  practical purpose,
> > > >  would be the correct state right now.
> > >
> > >  +CC The openrisc list
> > >
> > >  Understood, I don't think we would want that to happen.
> > Look at the entry today:
> >
> > OPENRISC ARCHITECTURE
> > M:      Jonas Bonn <jonas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > W:      http://openrisc.net
> > S:      Maintained
> > T:      git git://openrisc.net/~jonas/linux
> > F:      arch/openrisc/
> >
> > At the very least, W: and T: are incorrect and need to be updated or 
> > removed.
> > Plus, apparently there is a L:, and "T: 
> > https://github.com/openrisc/linux";
> > might be appropriate.
>
> Thanks,
> I am aware of this, we have since setup a new website, mailing list 
> and as you have found, git repo. Stefan has been nominated as the 
> maintainer by Jonas on a previous mail thread.
>
> The issue (as we see it) is that neither Stefan or I have signed PGP 
> keys by anyone in the web of trust.
>
> I sent this patch set with a cover lett trying to explain of the 
> situation trying to get some help.  Your reponses are very helpful.
>
> Do you think I should just send "git pull" reuqests to Linus with a 
> self signed pgp key and eplaination to see how it goes?

The bigger question I would have at this point is the value of the code 
remaining upstream...  Five years ago, there was a promise to try to get 
the toolchain upstream within a year or two; to this day, I don't know 
that much progress has been made there so this architecture still 
requires a hodge-podge of tools from various sources to build.

Given the toolchain maintainer's general reluctance to move things 
upstream, I'd almost be inclined to just remove the OpenRISC arch from 
the kernel altogether.  Are there any other arch's that can't be built 
with an upstream GCC at this point?

/Jonas

> -Stafford
>
> FYI
> I have a change as following in my backlog, as follows:
>
> ---
> @@ -8691,10 +8063,12 @@ F:      drivers/of/overlay.c
>  F:     drivers/of/resolver.c
>
>  OPENRISC ARCHITECTURE
> -M:    Jonas Bonn <jonas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> -W:    http://openrisc.net
> +M:    Stefan Kristiansson <stefan.kristiansson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> +M:    Stafford Horne <shorne@xxxxxxxxx>
> +W:    http://openrisc.io
> +L:    openrisc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> +T:    https://github.com/openrisc/linux.git
>  S:    Maintained
> -T:    git git://openrisc.net/~jonas/linux
>  F:    arch/openrisc/
>
>  OPENVSWITCH
>
> --