[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53DA1EF0.7060207@nvidia.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 13:48:16 +0300
From: Mikko Perttunen <mperttunen@...dia.com>
To: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
CC: Andrew Bresticker <abrestic@...omium.org>,
Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@...dia.com>,
Prashant Gaikwad <pgaikwad@...dia.com>,
Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] of: Add Tegra124 EMC bindings
On 29/07/14 18:49, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 07/29/2014 02:30 AM, Mikko Perttunen wrote:
>> Looks like the TRM doesn't document this either. I'll add an option
>> ("nvidia,short-ram-code" ?) for the next version.
>
> Using the 2-bit RAM code field as the RAM code is normal operation, so I
> wouldn't call this "short".
>
> Using the 2-bit boot device code field as extra RAM code bits is
> non-standard.
>
> I would suggest nvidia,use-4-bit-ram-code or
> nvidia,use-boot-device-code-as-ram-code-msbs(!) as the property.
Sure.
>
> I see that the TRM implies the whole 4-bit field is RAM code, rather
> than there being 2 separate 2-bit fields for RAM code and boot device
> code. Can you please file a bug against the TRM to document this
> correctly? (The details of which bits are which are visible on the
> Jetson TK1 schematics for example).
Yes, I'll file a bug.
- Mikko
--
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