linux-kernel - RE: [RFC V2] mfd: da9063: Add support for production silicon variant code

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 17 Mar 2014 08:33:36 +0000
From:	"Opensource [Steve Twiss]" <stwiss.opensource@...semi.com>
To:	Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
CC:	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
	David Dajun Chen <david.chen@...semi.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC V2] mfd: da9063: Add support for production silicon
 variant code

On 14 March 2014 14:37 Philipp Zabel wrote:

>Hi,
>
>Am Freitag, den 14.02.2014, 16:43 +0000 schrieb Lee Jones:
>> > From: Opensource [Steve Twiss] <stwiss.opensource@...semi.com>
>> >
>> > Add the correct silicon variant code ID (0x5) to the driver. This
>> > new code is the 'production' variant code ID for DA9063.
>> >
>> > This patch will remove the older variant code ID which matches the
>> > pre-production silicon ID (0x3) for the DA9063 chip.
>> >
>> > There is also some small amount of correction done in this patch:
>> > it splits the revision code and correctly names it according to
>> > the hardware specification and moves the dev_info() call before
>> > the variant ID test.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Opensource [Steve Twiss] <stwiss.opensource@...semi.com>
>>
>> Applied, thanks.
>
>we have a few i.MX6 Modules (imx6q-phytec-pfla02) with DA9063 PMICs that
>all report the model/revision ID as 0x61/0x03. Those are marked as
>follows:
>    dialog DA9063 44 1240EHDA
>    dialog DA9063 44 1312ECAF
>We now have received a report from Phytec that those PMICs were not
>marketed as preproduction in any way, but as a normal mask revision.

I will speak with our AEs this morning and try and get an answer to this one.

>Their Dialog Semiconductor contact talked about AD, BA, and BB silicon
>variants. How do those relate to the variant register value and to the
>markings on the chips?
>There seems to be a serious miscommunication somewhere.

Regards,
Steve