From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] U-Boot and CONFIG_SYS_DAVINCI_BROKEN_ECC
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 15:11:00 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49F61154.1060908@freescale.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200904271246.38626.david-b@pacbell.net>
David Brownell wrote:
> On Monday 27 April 2009, Scott Wood wrote:
>> It is for compatibility with a widely-deployed legacy ECC layout -- more
>> details can be found in the list archives.
>
> See my original query, which IMO disproves that assertion.
The entire mess was presented as being for compatibility in these threads:
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2008-June/036055.html
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2008-August/039679.html
If some portions of it aren't actually needed for compatibility, then we
can remove them.
Or we can remove the entire thing, if nobody cares anymore -- if anyone
out there does care and is using this, please speak up now.
> What this option enables differs in two ways from what the
> MontaVista code does. (Speaking here of the 1-bit HW ECC.
> The 4-bit support is another mess, which would be made far
> worse by needing to carry the BROKEN_ECC mode.)
I see no reason why new features would have to be supported on both
sides of the ifdef.
> Which is why I'm wondering what that original U-Boot code
> for HW ECC was trying to be "compatible" with, since it
> clearly wasn't MontaVista Linux ... or even the U-Boot
> versions I've seen be distributed with it.
MV 2.6.10 was the claim.
-Scott
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-27 20:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-04-26 18:11 [U-Boot] U-Boot and CONFIG_SYS_DAVINCI_BROKEN_ECC David Brownell
2009-04-26 22:40 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2009-04-26 22:51 ` Wolfgang Denk
2009-04-26 22:57 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2009-04-26 23:56 ` David Brownell
2009-04-27 2:08 ` Hugo Villeneuve
2009-04-27 18:56 ` Scott Wood
2009-04-27 19:46 ` David Brownell
2009-04-27 20:11 ` Scott Wood [this message]
2009-04-27 21:16 ` David Brownell
2009-05-04 0:39 ` Stephen Irons
2009-05-04 2:44 ` David Brownell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=49F61154.1060908@freescale.com \
--to=scottwood@freescale.com \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.