[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181109114818.GB30658@n2100.armlinux.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2018 11:48:19 +0000
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Chris Packham <chris.packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, jlu@...gutronix.de,
Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@...tlin.com>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
DTML <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 5/9] dt-bindings: ARM: document marvell,ecc-enable
binding
On Fri, Nov 09, 2018 at 12:40:06PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 8:04 AM Chris Packham
> <chris.packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz> wrote:
> >
> > Add documentation for the marvell,ecc-enable and marvell,ecc-disable
> > properties which can be used to enable/disable ECC on the Marvell aurora
> > cache.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Packham <chris.packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>
> > ---
>
> Why do you need both enable and disable? Wouldn't one of them be enough here?
It isn't an "on when ecc-enable is present, off when not" because the
current behaviour is to preserve these bits in the control register.
If we were to implement it as "if no ecc-enable property, turn off
ECC" then that would drastically change the behaviour - systems which
were configured for ECC suddenly lose ECC support.
Since we don't know which have it and which don't, we can't implement
the option like that.
--
RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 12.1Mbps down 622kbps up
According to speedtest.net: 11.9Mbps down 500kbps up
Powered by blists - more mailing lists