From: Jean Pihet Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] OMAP3: add support for 2 SDRAM chip selects Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 10:23:58 +0200 Message-ID: <200906091023.59112.jpihet@mvista.com> References: <200904291553.49378.jpihet@mvista.com> <87tz2q63mm.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> <1F18D6510CF0474A8C9500565A7E41A2054552C767@NOK-EUMSG-02.mgdnok.nokia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from gateway-1237.mvista.com ([63.81.120.158]:52060 "EHLO gateway-1237.mvista.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751013AbZFIIX6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Jun 2009 04:23:58 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1F18D6510CF0474A8C9500565A7E41A2054552C767@NOK-EUMSG-02.mgdnok.nokia.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Tero.Kristo@nokia.com Cc: khilman@deeprootsystems.com, paul@pwsan.com, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 09 June 2009 10:14:58 Tero.Kristo@nokia.com wrote: > >-----Original Message----- > >From: ext Kevin Hilman [mailto:khilman@deeprootsystems.com] > >Sent: 08 June, 2009 20:24 > >To: Jean Pihet > >Cc: Paul Walmsley; Kristo Tero (Nokia-D/Tampere); linux-omap > >Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] OMAP3: add support for 2 SDRAM chip selects > > > >Jean Pihet writes: > >> On Monday 08 June 2009 16:59:36 Kevin Hilman wrote: > >>> Jean Pihet writes: > >>> > Paul, > >>> > > >>> > Here is the updated patch that fixes the Overo build as well. > >>> > Can you check it? > >>> > > >>> > Kevin, can you push it if it is correct? > >>> > >>> Can you run it through checkpatch, fix the errors and also merge > >>> Tero's > >>> RX51 patch if it looks good to you. > >> > >> Ok. I will check. The cause might be the mailer. > >> > >> I think we need the omap_cfg_reg calls in the RX51 board > > > >file as well, > > > >> even if the bootloader has the mux setting already right. That way a > >> warning will be issued in case of a faulty bootloader. Do you agree? > > > >I agree. > > Well, this is ok for me too as it does not really change anything. I will > voice my opinion here though. :) > > I find it somewhat weird that we take care of two pads in this fashion out > of ~350 or so, where in most cases we just assume that the pads are > configured properly by the boot loader. Should we do the same for every > pad? Got your point. This omap_cfg_reg throws a warning if the pad is incorrectly configured. The goal is to better track the problem in case of a wrong/older bootloader. In the ideal world the bootloader and kernel should match and do it all right! > Does the kernel even boot if the CKE signals are configured > incorrectly? I would guess the boot loader will fail to load the kernel > image into SDRAM in that case. The kernel boots fine in that case, only the SDRAM contents are not preserved when going to low power mode. > > -Tero