Re: [PATCH] cmx270-nand: Make CMDLINE_PARTS usable

[Raphael Assenat <raph@8d.com>]

David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-09-22 at 10:15 -0400, Raphael Assenat wrote:
> 
>>Oh, sorry. My patch applies over the patch Mike Rapoport sent to the list on July 18
>>([PATCH] [MTD] CM-x270 NAND flash support), which I thought was already accepted. Was 
>>there anything wrong with it? Maybe you just missed it...
>>
>>I also sent a patch to the list on July 21 which added NAND flash support for the cm-x255 
>>boards ([PATCH] Add support for NAND flash on cm-x255) but received no feedback. I can 
>>resend it if you wish.
> 
> 
> July and August weren't really a good time for sending stuff that you
> expect me to pay attention to; sorry. Yes -- please retest and resend.
> 
> Can you explain how these two boards differ, and why they need two
> separate drivers?
Yes.

NAND on cm-x255:
- Uses physical address 0x04000000
- CS, ALE, CLE and RB mapped to pxa GPIOs 5,4,3,10 respectively.

NAND on cm-x270:
- CS and RB mapped to pxa GPIOs 11 and 89
- Read/Write with ALE/CLE inactive: 0x04000000
- Read/Write with ALE active: 0x04000008
- Read/Write with CLE active: 0x04000004

The base address is the same, but GPIOs used differ and the control signals
are controlled differently.


>>(BTW, every time I send to the linux-mtd list my message is held for moderator approval 
>>for reason 'Message has a suspicious header'. Who should I contact for more information? 
>>I'd like to know exactly what header(s) is/are 'suspicious' and fix them if possible).
> 
> 
> It just doesn't like attachments. Send patches inline and they shouldn't
> get trapped.

Best regards,

-- 
Raphael Assenat
8D Technologies Inc.