From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ding Tianhong Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] arm64: arch_timer: Add device tree binding for hisilicon-161x01 erratum Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 10:59:27 +0800 Message-ID: <05ebde92-60b5-88aa-0875-a9d2729eff8c@huawei.com> References: <962ea92f-870b-e1d0-5bb7-1a6d66c35122@huawei.com> <20161024111608.GG15620@leverpostej> <7e839df8-f8f7-3b16-8321-4ff45b6c5884@huawei.com> <20161024131617.GJ15620@leverpostej> <1dcfb21a-7417-282e-f187-425d2c148672@huawei.com> <20161024133945.GL15620@leverpostej> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20161024133945.GL15620@leverpostej> Sender: devicetree-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Mark Rutland Cc: Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Marc Zyngier , Scott Wood , devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Shawn Guo , stuart.yoder-3arQi8VN3Tc@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 2016/10/24 21:39, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 09:23:10PM +0800, Ding Tianhong wrote: >> On 2016/10/24 21:16, Mark Rutland wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 08:40:01PM +0800, Ding Tianhong wrote: >>>> On 2016/10/24 19:16, Mark Rutland wrote: >>>>> Is "161x01" the *exact* erratum number, or is the 'x' a wildcard? >>>> >>>> The 'x' is a wildcard, it will cover 161001 to 161601 several numbers, >>> >>> Given you're using a wildcard, I take it that this is a *part* number? >> >> Yes, I was doubt how to fix this, should I choose a better erratum number? > > Typically, we expect that each vendor has some central database of their > errata, with each having a unique ID. > > If Huawei do not have such a database, I do not think that we should > invent an erratum number here. > Hi Marko< After discussion with our chip developer, we decide the 161601 as the *exact* erratum number for this chip to cover all the problem and register this in our company's database, thanks. Ding > Thanks, > Mark. > > . > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: dingtianhong@huawei.com (Ding Tianhong) Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 10:59:27 +0800 Subject: [PATCH 1/3] arm64: arch_timer: Add device tree binding for hisilicon-161x01 erratum In-Reply-To: <20161024133945.GL15620@leverpostej> References: <962ea92f-870b-e1d0-5bb7-1a6d66c35122@huawei.com> <20161024111608.GG15620@leverpostej> <7e839df8-f8f7-3b16-8321-4ff45b6c5884@huawei.com> <20161024131617.GJ15620@leverpostej> <1dcfb21a-7417-282e-f187-425d2c148672@huawei.com> <20161024133945.GL15620@leverpostej> Message-ID: <05ebde92-60b5-88aa-0875-a9d2729eff8c@huawei.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 2016/10/24 21:39, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 09:23:10PM +0800, Ding Tianhong wrote: >> On 2016/10/24 21:16, Mark Rutland wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 08:40:01PM +0800, Ding Tianhong wrote: >>>> On 2016/10/24 19:16, Mark Rutland wrote: >>>>> Is "161x01" the *exact* erratum number, or is the 'x' a wildcard? >>>> >>>> The 'x' is a wildcard, it will cover 161001 to 161601 several numbers, >>> >>> Given you're using a wildcard, I take it that this is a *part* number? >> >> Yes, I was doubt how to fix this, should I choose a better erratum number? > > Typically, we expect that each vendor has some central database of their > errata, with each having a unique ID. > > If Huawei do not have such a database, I do not think that we should > invent an erratum number here. > Hi Marko< After discussion with our chip developer, we decide the 161601 as the *exact* erratum number for this chip to cover all the problem and register this in our company's database, thanks. Ding > Thanks, > Mark. > > . >