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: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 20:40:01 +0800 Message-ID: <7e839df8-f8f7-3b16-8321-4ff45b6c5884@huawei.com> References: <962ea92f-870b-e1d0-5bb7-1a6d66c35122@huawei.com> <20161024111608.GG15620@leverpostej> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20161024111608.GG15620@leverpostej> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Mark Rutland Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Marc Zyngier , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , stuart.yoder@nxp.com, Scott Wood , Shawn Guo , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 2016/10/24 19:16, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 11:21:10AM +0800, Ding Tianhong wrote: >> +- hisilicon,erratum-161x01 : A boolean property. Indicates the presence of >> + QorIQ erratum 161201, which says that reading the counter is >> + unreliable unless the small range of value is returned by back-to-back reads. >> + This also affects writes to the tval register, due to the implicit >> + counter read. > > Is "161x01" the *exact* erratum number, or is the 'x' a wildcard? Please > use the *exact* erratum number, even if that means we have to list > several. > Hi Mark: The 'x' is a wildcard, it will cover 161001 to 161601 several numbers, I will discuss to the chip develop and get a exact erratum number. Thanks. Ding > Is "161x01" an *erratum* number, or the *part* number of affected > devices? > > Thanks, > Mark. > > . > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: dingtianhong@huawei.com (Ding Tianhong) Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 20:40:01 +0800 Subject: [PATCH 1/3] arm64: arch_timer: Add device tree binding for hisilicon-161x01 erratum In-Reply-To: <20161024111608.GG15620@leverpostej> References: <962ea92f-870b-e1d0-5bb7-1a6d66c35122@huawei.com> <20161024111608.GG15620@leverpostej> Message-ID: <7e839df8-f8f7-3b16-8321-4ff45b6c5884@huawei.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 2016/10/24 19:16, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 11:21:10AM +0800, Ding Tianhong wrote: >> +- hisilicon,erratum-161x01 : A boolean property. Indicates the presence of >> + QorIQ erratum 161201, which says that reading the counter is >> + unreliable unless the small range of value is returned by back-to-back reads. >> + This also affects writes to the tval register, due to the implicit >> + counter read. > > Is "161x01" the *exact* erratum number, or is the 'x' a wildcard? Please > use the *exact* erratum number, even if that means we have to list > several. > Hi Mark: The 'x' is a wildcard, it will cover 161001 to 161601 several numbers, I will discuss to the chip develop and get a exact erratum number. Thanks. Ding > Is "161x01" an *erratum* number, or the *part* number of affected > devices? > > Thanks, > Mark. > > . >