On Mon, 2 Jun 2025 10:53:19 +0200 Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 2/6/25 08:13, Thomas Huth wrote: > > On 09/05/2025 17.23, Igor Mammedov wrote: > >> On Thu, 8 May 2025 15:35:24 +0200 > >> Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >>> These machines has been supported for a period of more than 6 years. > >>> According to our versioned machine support policy (see commit > >>> ce80c4fa6ff "docs: document special exception for machine type > >>> deprecation & removal") they can now be removed. > >> > >> if these machine types are the last users of compat arrays, > >> it's better to remove array at the same time, aka squash > >> those patches later in series into this one. > >> That leaves no illusion that compats could be used in the later patches. > > > > IMHO the generic hw_compat array should be treated separately since this > > is independent from x86. So in case someone ever needs to backport these > > patches to an older branch, they can decide more easily whether they > > want to apply the generic hw_compat part or only the x86-specific part > > of this series. > > Yes, it is clearer this way than squashed. ok, let's leave it as is. >
