On 27/08/2020 16.19, Peter Maydell wrote: > On Thu, 27 Aug 2020 at 14:52, Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> wrote: >> What's next? moxie? ... apart from the tree-wide clean-ups and trivial >> fixes, moxie did not have any major updates since 2013 when it has been >> added, as far as I can see ... is anybody still using it? > > I was never very clear on how much use moxie had to start with... > > An extremely rough-and-ready guide to how well-loved a target > is might be "did it get converted to TranslatorOps?". Unconverted: > * avr > * cris > * lm32 (deprecation in progress) > * microblaze (rth just posted patches for this) > * moxie > * nios2 > * tilegx (deprecation in progress) > * unicore32 (deprecation in progress)
Another criteria might be: Do we have a tcg, qtest or acceptance test to check that the target is still working? - avr has an acceptance test - cris has tcg tests - lm32 has tcg tests - microblaze has acceptance tests (and one trivial qtest) - moxie ... has only one very trivial qtest (boot-serial-test) - nios2 has an acceptance test - tilegx does not have any tests at all - unicore32 does not have any tests at all (not counting the trivial machine-none-test) So from that point of view, unicore32, tilegx and moxie are the candidates for deprecation. > I think dropping the moxie maintainer an email to ask about > the architecture's status wouldn't be a bad idea if you > wanted to start that ball rolling. Ok, good idea, I'll try to write a mail later today. Thomas
