* Nishanth Menon [off-list ref] [150317 09:57]:

On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Tony Lindgren [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

quoted

On 03/17/2015 11:26 AM, santosh shilimkar wrote:

quoted

On 3/16/2015 4:30 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:

quoted

* Stefan Hengelein [off-list ref] [150225 10:48]:

quoted

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 <redacted>

---
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@kernel.org>

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