Subject: [PATCH RFC] ARM: at91: removal of CAP9 SoC family

From: [email-masked] (Greg KH)
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 10:16:37 -0800

On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 12:10:47PM +0100, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> On 01/06/2012 04:33 PM, Nicolas Ferre :
> > Atmel CAP9 family is not maintained well and products may be
> > difficult to find now. It will allow to save workforce and
> > remove LOC during current cleanup process.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Nicolas Ferre <[email-masked]>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt |   14 ++++++++++++++
> >  1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> Hi Andrew, Greg,
> 
> Can you please take this patch or is somebody else in charge of this file?

Why wouldn't the maintainers of the feature you are saying is going away
be the ones responsible for submitting this?

> It it is going to mainline through you, can you add also:
> 
> Acked-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <[email-masked]>
> 
> Or tell me to resend a complete patch.
> 
> Thanks for your help, best regards,
> 
> 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt b/Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt
> > index 3d84912..23dfea5 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt
> > @@ -551,3 +551,17 @@ When:	3.5
> >  Why:	The iwlagn module has been renamed iwlwifi.  The alias will be around
> >  	for backward compatibility for several cycles and then dropped.
> >  Who:	Don Fry <[email-masked]>
> > +
> > +----------------------------
> > +
> > +What:	The CAP9 SoC family will be removed
> > +When:	3.4
> > +Files:	arch/arm/mach-at91/at91cap9.c
> > +	arch/arm/mach-at91/at91cap9_devices.c
> > +	arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/at91cap9.h
> > +	arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/at91cap9_matrix.h
> > +	arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/at91cap9_ddrsdr.h
> > +	arch/arm/mach-at91/board-cap9adk.c
> > +Why:	The code is not actively maintained and platforms are now hard to find.
> > +Who:	Nicolas Ferre <[email-masked]>
> > +	Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <[email-masked]>

Ok, why not send this through the ARM tree?  Why need me and Andrew?

confused,

greg k-h