Re: x86/uv cleanups

[Thomas Gleixner]

Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@xxxxxxx> writes:
> Yes, we do see a need to clean up old code where it exists, but we would like
> to assume this responsibility ourselves in order to ensure functional continuity
> with externally available open-sourced modules that our customers rely on.  This
> code supports current Superdome Flex systems, as well as forthcoming platforms
> based on Intel Cooper Lake and Sapphire Rapids processors.  Some cleanup is
> already being included as part of a forthcoming patchset in support of the
> upcoming Sapphire Rapids platform.

That's a completely bogus argument.

 1) You could have cleaned up that code long ago

 2) The rule for code which is unused in the mainline kernel is that it
    can be removed during spring cleaning unless there is a compelling
    reason. I can't see one here.

 3) Out of tree modules are not supported independent of the license.
    It's not our problem that you have code out of tree which you could
    have upstreamed long ago.

Look at the history of platform/uv code. All we see from you guys is:

 - Drops of adding support for new platforms

 - Occasional fixes when we managed to break UV or you found some bug in
   your precious code.

> Nacked-by: Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@xxxxxxx>

I'm happy to add that tag when merging this cleanup.

Thanks,

        tglx