From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Brownell Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2009 16:56:40 -0700 Subject: [U-Boot] U-Boot and CONFIG_SYS_DAVINCI_BROKEN_ECC In-Reply-To: <20090426225722.GN32215@game.jcrosoft.org> References: <200904261111.48584.david-b@pacbell.net> <20090426225129.052A783420E8@gemini.denx.de> <20090426225722.GN32215@game.jcrosoft.org> Message-ID: <200904261656.40151.david-b@pacbell.net> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Sunday 26 April 2009, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > > > > > Before I submit a patch to remove it from U-Boot GIT (nothing > > > > there enables it, and it will nastify 4-bit support), I thought > > > > I'd see if anyone knows exactly what software it was trying to > > > > emulate. ?... > > > > > > maybe add it in the feature-removal-schedule.txt > > > will let people time to explain why they need it > > > > Hm... I don't think this is needed. > > > > Since there are no users of this code in U-Boot, we can as well > > remove it without warning. That was my thought. If it were important enough to keep in *this* source base, someone would have submitted some board that uses it. It's badly enough broken that I don't know who would bother using it, though; anyone trying to use it has some kind of (non-Linux?) support nightmare already. > no necessarelly the boards Maintainer choose to use the other ECC but part > of the U-Boot user may need it. > So add it in the removal schedule make sense. We can evenif plan it for the next > Release. I wouldn't mind doing that. > > > After my only request will be to use the same ECC as the mainline kernel > > > or if someone explain why he need it add on other ECC algo Right, mainline does not use that "broken" ECC. I can't figure out who *does* use it, either... - Dave