public inbox for u-boot@lists.denx.de
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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

  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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox