[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3e59d670-ee96-4ff2-a6c6-99d8a030e16c@foss.st.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2025 09:30:46 +0200
From: Clement LE GOFFIC <clement.legoffic@...s.st.com>
To: Julius Werner <jwerner@...omium.org>
CC: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Rob
Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor
Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>,
Philipp Zabel
<p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Gatien Chevallier
<gatien.chevallier@...s.st.com>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
Gabriel Fernandez
<gabriel.fernandez@...s.st.com>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
Le
Goffic <legoffic.clement@...il.com>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/19] dt-bindings: memory: introduce DDR4
Hi Julius,
On 7/22/25 23:57, Julius Werner wrote:
>> + - pattern: "^ddr4-[0-9a-f]{2},[0-9a-f]{4}$"
>
> This pattern doesn't really make sense when DDR4 doesn't have the same
> manufacturer ID / revision ID format as LPDDR. You could either only
> leave the fallback constant for now, or define a new auto-generated
> format that matches what DDR4 SPD provides (which I believe, if I read
> Wikipedia right, is a two byte manufacturer ID and then an up to 20
> character ASCII part number string -- so it could be
> `^ddr4-[0-9a-f{2},[0-9A-Za-z]{1,20}$`).
Oh ok I didn't catch that it should be from the SPD.
I'll propose something.
Best regards,
Clément
Powered by blists - more mailing lists