[U-Boot] Potential issue with recent OMAP PRCM struct unification

[Sricharan R <r.sricharan@ti.com>]

On Tuesday 02 April 2013 08:47 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On 04/02/2013 11:06 AM, Sricharan R wrote:
>> On Tuesday 02 April 2013 05:59 PM, Michael Cashwell wrote:
>>> On Apr 2, 2013, at 5:32 AM, Sricharan R <r.sricharan@ti.com> 
>>> wrote:
> [snip]
>>>> Also why are you enabling the non-essential clocks ?
>>>
>>> Because I must be able to boot Linux kernels as far back as
>>> 3.0.8 which predates this paradigm shift.
>>>
>>>> Now enabling non-essential clocks is deprecated and they are 
>>>> **not** by enabled by default.
>>>
>>> As a point of clarification, are you asserting that 
>>> CONFIG_SYS_CLOCKS_ENABLE_ALL and CONFIG_SYS_ENABLE_PADS_ALL have 
>>> been officially deprecated (e.g.: is planned for removal from 
>>> u-boot)?
>>>
>>> There is no mention of this anywhere within the source tree, 
>>> including in any documentation or README and, IMO, it would be 
>>> very premature given that at least 4 Linux kernel lines needing 
>>> these inits are still within their longterm support window.
>>>
>>> But clearly until such removal happens dropping any that were 
>>> previously handled is a regression.
>>>
>>> Thanks for the assistance!
>>>
>> Yes, thats why we still have kept it for testing. But now, there 
>> are already patches to fix this in the kernel being posted, and 
>> probably all of them should be fixed shortly. Once that is done, 
>> all of this can be removed.
> 
> So, here's my 2 cents on this.  We can't up and drop these options
> from U-Boot until there's a complete / viable kernel tthhat doesn't need
> them.  I'm _not_ saying we need to test every patchset vs an old
> kernel or anything, but we shouldn't intentionally make life harder on
> folks, until we can just pull the option all together (and say use a
> new kernel, or an older u-boot).
> 
  Hmm, Agree this should not be broken unintentionally.
  But because we purposefully deprecated this, kernel is now getting
  fixed. Fixing any thing towards this deprecated one, will again introduce
  the luxury of not addressing in kernel, which is not good. If we propose
  of removing this in U-BOOT after every thing is fixed in kernel, we still
  will have of need of supporting for older kernels..
 
Regards,
 Sricharan