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

From: Guenter Roeck
Date: Mon Sep 19 2016 - 10:55:15 EST

On 09/19/2016 07:35 AM, Jonas Bonn wrote:
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:

M: Jonas Bonn <jonas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
S: Maintained
T: git git://
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:";
might be appropriate.

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?

Yes, several. Definitely avr32. Several others don't build with the upstream gcc,
but no one really cares enough to fix it.




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

-M: Jonas Bonn <jonas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
+M: Stefan Kristiansson <stefan.kristiansson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
+M: Stafford Horne <shorne@xxxxxxxxx>
+L: openrisc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
S: Maintained
-T: git git://
F: arch/openrisc/