[U-Boot] [PATCH] CONFIG_BOOTDELAY default should not affect runtime

[Otavio Salvador]

On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Wolfgang Denk <wd at denx.de> wrote:
> Dear Otavio Salvador,
>
> In message <CAP9ODKr3xaU_Vg7YgjYOsntD03YvLaygRdSZC-Y4jQgDi+D7sw at mail.gmail.com> you wrote:
>>
>> >> include/configs/RPXsuper.h:#define CONFIG_BOOTDELAY        -1
>> >> include/configs/ep8260.h:#define CONFIG_BOOTDELAY        -1
>> >> include/configs/espt.h:#define CONFIG_BOOTDELAY        -1
>> >> include/configs/scb9328.h:#define CONFIG_BOOTDELAY   -1
>> >> include/configs/sh7763rdp.h:#define CONFIG_BOOTDELAY        -1
>> >>
>> >> So maybe those could have CONFIG_BOOTDELAY undefined keeping them
>> >> working as before?
>> >
>> > Yes, they could.  But it is a change of a long-standing behaviour, and
>> > we try to avoid breaking existing boards.  At minimum this needs to be
>> > announced, the respective board maintainers need to be modified, and
>> > given sufficient time to react.
>>
>> Yes; I agree but breaking out of tree boards ... well, it is the price
>> of not working upstream so I think it cannot be a blocker for U-Boot
>> improvements and cleanups.
>
> You also change behaviour (and thus potentially break) at least 5
> boards in mainline.  See also [1] about breaking user space in Linux
> (which is pretty much equivalent to what would happen here).
>
> [1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1414106

I see it different; I understand we cannot break current boards so a
patch should also convert the boards to the new behavior.

I also don't see a compare it to user space in Linux fair, I think
it'd be more like a driver API change in Linux and Linux breaks API
for out of tree drivers very ofthen so I think same fits here.

-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
E-mail: otavio at ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854              http://projetos.ossystems.com.br