[U-Boot] U-Boot and CONFIG_SYS_DAVINCI_BROKEN_ECC

[Scott Wood]

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