[U-Boot] [HELP]: sf: winbond: add W25Q32

[U-Boot] [HELP]: sf: winbond: add W25Q32

[Jagan Teki]

Hi Rajeshwari,

+       {
+               .id                     = 0x5014,

is this id code is correct? it seems like 0x4014

+               .nr_blocks              = 128,

nr_blocks must be 16 i think?

+               .name                   = "W25Q80",
+       },
 };

Honestly the commit message itself is wrong, i guess.

Please comment.

Thanks,
Jagan.

[U-Boot] [HELP]: sf: winbond: add W25Q32

[Jagan Teki]

Hi,

Any update on this, is this a different part w.r.t what I refer for?

Thanks,
Jagan.

On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Rajeshwari,
>
> +       {
> +               .id                     = 0x5014,
>
> is this id code is correct? it seems like 0x4014
>
> +               .nr_blocks              = 128,
>
> nr_blocks must be 16 i think?
>
> +               .name                   = "W25Q80",
> +       },
>  };
>
> Honestly the commit message itself is wrong, i guess.
>
> Please comment.
>
> Thanks,
> Jagan.

[U-Boot] [HELP]: sf: winbond: add W25Q32

[Rajeshwari Birje]

Hi Jagan,

Hope following reply answer your query.

On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 2:08 AM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Any update on this, is this a different part w.r.t what I refer for?
>
> Thanks,
> Jagan.
>
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Rajeshwari,
>>
>> +       {
>> +               .id                     = 0x5014,
>>
>> is this id code is correct? it seems like 0x4014
When you see the datasheet of W25Q80BW page 16, the table says its 5014h
>>
>> +               .nr_blocks              = 128,
>>
>> nr_blocks must be 16 i think?
We use W25Q80BW which is 8MB, hence it is correct as per following calculation;
flash->size = 4096 * 16 * params->nr_blocks;
>>
>> +               .name                   = "W25Q80",
>> +       },
>>  };
>>
>> Honestly the commit message itself is wrong, i guess.
Yes this I agree is my fault, but wonder how it went in through all the reviews.
>>
>> Please comment.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jagan.
> _______________________________________________
> U-Boot mailing list
> U-Boot at lists.denx.de
> http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

-- 
Regards,
Rajeshwari Shinde

[U-Boot] [HELP]: sf: winbond: add W25Q32

[Jagan Teki]

Hi,

Thanks for your response.

On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Rajeshwari Birje
<rajeshwari.birje@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Jagan,
>
> Hope following reply answer your query.
>
> On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 2:08 AM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Any update on this, is this a different part w.r.t what I refer for?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jagan.
>>
>> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Rajeshwari,
>>>
>>> +       {
>>> +               .id                     = 0x5014,
>>>
>>> is this id code is correct? it seems like 0x4014
> When you see the datasheet of W25Q80BW page 16, the table says its 5014h
>>>
>>> +               .nr_blocks              = 128,
>>>
>>> nr_blocks must be 16 i think?
> We use W25Q80BW which is 8MB, hence it is correct as per following calculation;
> flash->size = 4096 * 16 * params->nr_blocks;

Yes, it is 8M-BIT so the nr_blocks should be 16 to calculate the flash
size as 1Mbyte.

--
Thanks,
Jagan.

>>>
>>> +               .name                   = "W25Q80",
>>> +       },
>>>  };
>>>
>>> Honestly the commit message itself is wrong, i guess.
> Yes this I agree is my fault, but wonder how it went in through all the reviews.
>>>
>>> Please comment.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Jagan.
>> _______________________________________________
>> U-Boot mailing list
>> U-Boot at lists.denx.de
>> http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
>
> --
> Regards,
> Rajeshwari Shinde

[U-Boot] [HELP]: sf: winbond: add W25Q32

[Jagan Teki]

Hi Rajeshwari,

On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for your response.
>
> On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Rajeshwari Birje
> <rajeshwari.birje@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Jagan,
>>
>> Hope following reply answer your query.
>>
>> On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 2:08 AM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Any update on this, is this a different part w.r.t what I refer for?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Jagan.
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi Rajeshwari,
>>>>
>>>> +       {
>>>> +               .id                     = 0x5014,
>>>>
>>>> is this id code is correct? it seems like 0x4014
>> When you see the datasheet of W25Q80BW page 16, the table says its 5014h
>>>>
>>>> +               .nr_blocks              = 128,
>>>>
>>>> nr_blocks must be 16 i think?
>> We use W25Q80BW which is 8MB, hence it is correct as per following calculation;
>> flash->size = 4096 * 16 * params->nr_blocks;
>
> Yes, it is 8M-BIT so the nr_blocks should be 16 to calculate the flash
> size as 1Mbyte.
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Jagan.
>
>>>>
>>>> +               .name                   = "W25Q80",
>>>> +       },
>>>>  };
>>>>
>>>> Honestly the commit message itself is wrong, i guess.
>> Yes this I agree is my fault, but wonder how it went in through all the reviews.

1. Can you please revert this patch, as commit message not looks good
me and also some incorrect nr_blocks
    Please mentioned the exact details on commit message body "reason
for reverting"
2. And also send one more patch with a proper details. [exact name,
nr_blocks .etc]

---
Thanks,
Jagan.

[U-Boot] [HELP]: sf: winbond: add W25Q32

[Rajeshwari Birje]

Hi Jagan,

Yes you are right it has to be 16.
So you want me to and send a patch correcting it?
Or you want me to revert it and send a new patch?

-- 
Regards,
Rajeshwari Shinde
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Rajeshwari,
>
> On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Thanks for your response.
>>
>> On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Rajeshwari Birje
>> <rajeshwari.birje@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Jagan,
>>>
>>> Hope following reply answer your query.
>>>
>>> On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 2:08 AM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Any update on this, is this a different part w.r.t what I refer for?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Jagan.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hi Rajeshwari,
>>>>>
>>>>> +       {
>>>>> +               .id                     = 0x5014,
>>>>>
>>>>> is this id code is correct? it seems like 0x4014
>>> When you see the datasheet of W25Q80BW page 16, the table says its 5014h
>>>>>
>>>>> +               .nr_blocks              = 128,
>>>>>
>>>>> nr_blocks must be 16 i think?
>>> We use W25Q80BW which is 8MB, hence it is correct as per following calculation;
>>> flash->size = 4096 * 16 * params->nr_blocks;
>>
>> Yes, it is 8M-BIT so the nr_blocks should be 16 to calculate the flash
>> size as 1Mbyte.
>>
>> --
>> Thanks,
>> Jagan.
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> +               .name                   = "W25Q80",
>>>>> +       },
>>>>>  };
>>>>>
>>>>> Honestly the commit message itself is wrong, i guess.
>>> Yes this I agree is my fault, but wonder how it went in through all the reviews.
>
> 1. Can you please revert this patch, as commit message not looks good
> me and also some incorrect nr_blocks
>     Please mentioned the exact details on commit message body "reason
> for reverting"
> 2. And also send one more patch with a proper details. [exact name,
> nr_blocks .etc]
>
> ---
> Thanks,
> Jagan.

[U-Boot] [HELP]: sf: winbond: add W25Q32

[Jagan Teki]

On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Rajeshwari Birje
<rajeshwari.birje@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Jagan,
>
> Yes you are right it has to be 16.
> So you want me to and send a patch correcting it?
> Or you want me to revert it and send a new patch?
>
> --
> Regards,
> Rajeshwari Shinde
> On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Rajeshwari,
>>
>> On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Thanks for your response.
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Rajeshwari Birje
>>> <rajeshwari.birje@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi Jagan,
>>>>
>>>> Hope following reply answer your query.
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 2:08 AM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Any update on this, is this a different part w.r.t what I refer for?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Jagan.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Rajeshwari,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +       {
>>>>>> +               .id                     = 0x5014,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> is this id code is correct? it seems like 0x4014
>>>> When you see the datasheet of W25Q80BW page 16, the table says its 5014h
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +               .nr_blocks              = 128,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> nr_blocks must be 16 i think?
>>>> We use W25Q80BW which is 8MB, hence it is correct as per following calculation;
>>>> flash->size = 4096 * 16 * params->nr_blocks;
>>>
>>> Yes, it is 8M-BIT so the nr_blocks should be 16 to calculate the flash
>>> size as 1Mbyte.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thanks,
>>> Jagan.
>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +               .name                   = "W25Q80",
>>>>>> +       },
>>>>>>  };
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Honestly the commit message itself is wrong, i guess.
>>>> Yes this I agree is my fault, but wonder how it went in through all the reviews.
>>
>> 1. Can you please revert this patch, as commit message not looks good
>> me and also some incorrect nr_blocks
>>     Please mentioned the exact details on commit message body "reason
>> for reverting"
>> 2. And also send one more patch with a proper details. [exact name,
>> nr_blocks .etc]

Not required, i sent it already.

http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/246644/

Thanks,
Jagan.