From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Shilimkar, Santosh" Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/7] omap4: Temporary fix silicon version detection Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2010 17:32:46 +0530 Message-ID: References: <1284031395-25988-1-git-send-email-santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> <1284031395-25988-2-git-send-email-santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> <1284031395-25988-3-git-send-email-santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> <20100909114255.GK21060@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> <4C88C940.6070000@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Return-path: Received: from devils.ext.ti.com ([198.47.26.153]:43409 "EHLO devils.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753549Ab0IIMCy convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Sep 2010 08:02:54 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4C88C940.6070000@ti.com> Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: "Cousson, Benoit" , "Balbi, Felipe" Cc: "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "tony@atomide.com" , "khilman@deeprootsystems.com" > -----Original Message----- > From: Cousson, Benoit > Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2010 5:17 PM > To: Balbi, Felipe > Cc: Shilimkar, Santosh; linux-omap@vger.kernel.org; tony@atomide.com; > khilman@deeprootsystems.com > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] omap4: Temporary fix silicon version detection > > Hi Santosh, > > On 9/9/2010 1:42 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Thu, Sep 09, 2010 at 06:23:10AM -0500, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: > >> @@ -308,6 +308,16 @@ static void __init omap4_check_revision(void) > >> hawkeye = (idcode>> 12)& 0xffff; > >> rev = (idcode>> 28)& 0xff; > >> > >> + /* > >> + * FIXME: This patch should be reverted later. > >> + * Few initial ES2.0 samples IDCODE is same as ES1.0 > >> + * Use ARM register to detect the correct ES version > >> + */ > > > > I wonder if it actually doesn't make sense to keep this in tree, the > > overhead is minimum when rev is set correctly and it's safe for the > > initial es2.0 samples which are buggy. > > Yep, I agree with that, if some early ES2 samples are already out there, > we will have no way to control the device upgrade in the future. So we > will still have to support these early buggy devices just in case. > Felipe is suggesting not to add this support where as you want to have this support. Sorry if I haven't understood the comment. Care to clarify Regards, Santosh