From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com (Ezequiel Garcia) Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2013 15:53:52 -0300 Subject: [PATCH 04/10] bus: introduce an Marvell EBU MBus driver In-Reply-To: <20130308183120.GG4094@obsidianresearch.com> References: <20130306214036.62fc93b9@skate> <20130306215031.GB4916@obsidianresearch.com> <20130306222712.GP23237@titan.lakedaemon.net> <20130306230412.GA5870@obsidianresearch.com> <20130307222004.GA2450@localhost> <20130307230516.GA28975@obsidianresearch.com> <20130308091052.18612729@skate> <20130308172950.GC4094@obsidianresearch.com> <20130308175926.GC8693@localhost> <20130308183120.GG4094@obsidianresearch.com> Message-ID: <20130308185350.GA2469@localhost> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 11:31:20AM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 02:59:27PM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > > > > I looked through Ezequiel's patch and saw a driver that provided those > > > properties and no user of them at all. Are the patches incomplete? Is > > > there some plan to use these values in the future? > > > Leaving aside the review comments that still I haven't addressed yet, > > the patchset is complete. > > > The timings parameters were not set in device tree files, > > not because I expected the bootloader to set them, but instead because > > SoC default values worked fine for the NOR devices I tested. > > ? Isn't that the same thing? Were the timing registers the SOC reset > default or were they leftover from the bootloader? > IMHO, SoC reset default value is not the same as leftover from bootloader, right? But this doesn't mean the driver is not useful to set proper parameter values in case default/bootloader are wrong or suboptimal. > > If this is suboptimal, I can fix the device tree files in v2 > > to set proper timings parameter values. > > I have no opinion on this for your boards, it depends entirely on what > flash chips you have to be compatible with, and how you feel about > your bootloader. > > Also, when looking at the idea from Maxime it occured to me that your > DT binding might be better using ns or ps for the timings, instead of > tclk cycles? That way NAND/NOR datasheet values can be included in the > DT directly and are correct no matter what the tclk frequency is set to. > Mmm... that sounds like a better aproach. I'll think about that. -- Ezequiel Garc?a, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android Engineering http://free-electrons.com