[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5A47E75E594F054BAF48C5E4FC4B92AB03242222C6@dbde02.ent.ti.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 12:32:53 +0530
From: "Gopinath, Thara" <thara@...com>
To: "felipe.balbi@...ia.com" <felipe.balbi@...ia.com>
CC: Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-omap@...r.kernel.org" <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/4] mfd: twl-core: switch over to defines in twl.h
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Felipe Balbi [mailto:felipe.balbi@...ia.com]
>>Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 12:29 PM
>>To: Gopinath, Thara
>>Cc: Balbi Felipe (Nokia-MS/Helsinki); Samuel Ortiz; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux-
>>omap@...r.kernel.org; Tony Lindgren; Andrew Morton
>>Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] mfd: twl-core: switch over to defines in twl.h
>>
>>On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 08:32:57AM +0200, ext Gopinath, Thara wrote:
>>>R_PROTECT_KEY offset is 0xE where as the new TWL4030_PM_MASTER_PROTECT_KEY
>>>is defined as 0xd. I have not checked the trm to see which is correct. But
>>
>>you can use either 0xc0|0x0c or 0xce|0xec, both will work are unlock
>>keys.
No I am not talking about the key values. I was talking about the register offset
for TWL4030_PM_MASTER_PROTECT_KEY. My question is, is it ok for it to be 0xd or 0xe.
Earlier we were using 0xd and in the new implementation it has been changed to 0xe.
Regards
Thara
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists