* Nishanth Menon <nm@xxxxxx> [150317 09:57]: > On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 03/17/2015 11:26 AM, santosh shilimkar wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> > On 3/16/2015 4:30 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > >> >> * Stefan Hengelein <stefan.hengelein@xxxxxx> [150225 10:48]: > >> >>> The Kconfig-Option OMAP4_ERRATA_I688 is never visible due to a > >> >>> contradiction in it's dependencies. > >> >>> The option requires ARCH_MULTIPLATFORM to be 'disabled'. However, an > >> >>> enclosing menu requires either ARCH_MULTI_V6 or ARCH_MULTI_V7 to be > >> >>> enabled. These options inherit a dependency from an enclosing menu, > >> >>> that requires ARCH_MULTIPLATFORM to be 'enabled'. > >> >>> This is a contradiction and made this option also unavailable for > >> >>> non-multiplatform configurations. > >> >>> > >> >>> Since there are no selects on OMAP4_ERRATA_I688, which would ignore > >> >>> dependencies, the code related to that option is dead and can be > >> >>> removed. > >> >>> > >> >>> This (logical) defect has been found with the undertaker tool. > >> >>> (https://undertaker.cs.fau.de) > >> >>> > >> >>> Signed-off-by: Stefan Hengelein <stefan.hengelein@xxxxxx> > >> >>> > >> >>> --- > >> >>> Tony Lindgren suggested to remove the code since nobody complained for > >> >>> a few years and Santosh Shilimkar agreed. > >> >>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/2/25/449 > >> >>> --- > >> >>> As far as I see, this should remove all the code related to > >> >>> OMAP4_ERRATA_I688, I hope I didn't remove too much. > >> >> > >> >> Seems to boot fine, so applying into omap-for-v4.1/fixes-not-urgent. > >> >> > >> > Acked-by: Santosh Shilimkar <ssantosh@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> We no longer need i688? I do understand the need to cleanup the macros > >> for multi-arch etc.. but loosing a bug workaround for a real silicon > >> bug is really an invitation for hard to debug issues IMHO. > > > > Well that code has not been selectable for a few years now. Naturally > > we can add it back when it actually does something with multiarch. > > > > I suppose we are sure that downstream kernels that actually try stuff > out never went ahead and enabled this.. we do have non multi-platform > builds as well... I am just saying... having been around during the > discovery of i688, I kinda know how much pain it takes to find the > damn thing in the first place. a simple boot was not ever an easy > enough test for it. I do suggest at least adding a print for omap4 > saying that i688 is disabled.. Yes that's a good point and adding a printk is a good idea. Care to crank out a separate patch for that? Regards, Tony -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
