All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: eric@eukrea.com (Eric Bénard)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] ARM: imx: Add mx53 support to common msl functions.
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2010 21:30:26 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CD317E2.9090504@eukrea.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <86A0E76937111F4C92FABEC0A20988510523CEC2@az33exm21>

Hi Dinh,

Le 04/11/2010 20:21, Nguyen Dinh-R00091 a ?crit :
> Reading the ROM code is probably the most reliable way to get the correct
> silicon revision. Because the ROM that is on the chip is "most likely"
> up-to-date with the silicon. "Most likely" means that 95% of the time, when
> you get a new silicon, the ROM code will get updated. There is still a
> chance that a new silicon will not require a ROM update.
>
> Also the other reason is that sometimes the fuses that identify the silicon
> revision that are used by the IIM are sometimes not blown to reflect the
> correct revision in pre-production parts. MX51 is a post production part,
> so in theory, the fuses are blown correctly. But since we made MX51 boards
> available prior to going into production, reading from the IIM is not as
> reliable as reading the ROM.
>
Don't you think we should use the documented register which (if we believe the 
documentation) should be 100% reliable for production CPU instead of this 
undocumented method which from what you say is 95% reliable and here to handle 
the case of pre production CPU ?

The same problem occured on i.MX35 silicon 2.1 which where not correctly 
detected using the ROM code.

Eric

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Eric Bénard" <eric@eukrea.com>
To: Nguyen Dinh-R00091 <R00091@freescale.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, amit.kucheria@canonical.com,
	linux@arm.linux.org.uk, s.hauer@pengutronix.de,
	grant.likely@secretlab.ca, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	daniel@caiaq.de, u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de,
	Zhang Lily-R58066 <R58066@freescale.com>,
	valentin.longchamp@epfl.ch
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ARM: imx: Add mx53 support to common msl functions.
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2010 21:30:26 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CD317E2.9090504@eukrea.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <86A0E76937111F4C92FABEC0A20988510523CEC2@az33exm21>

Hi Dinh,

Le 04/11/2010 20:21, Nguyen Dinh-R00091 a écrit :
> Reading the ROM code is probably the most reliable way to get the correct
> silicon revision. Because the ROM that is on the chip is "most likely"
> up-to-date with the silicon. "Most likely" means that 95% of the time, when
> you get a new silicon, the ROM code will get updated. There is still a
> chance that a new silicon will not require a ROM update.
>
> Also the other reason is that sometimes the fuses that identify the silicon
> revision that are used by the IIM are sometimes not blown to reflect the
> correct revision in pre-production parts. MX51 is a post production part,
> so in theory, the fuses are blown correctly. But since we made MX51 boards
> available prior to going into production, reading from the IIM is not as
> reliable as reading the ROM.
>
Don't you think we should use the documented register which (if we believe the 
documentation) should be 100% reliable for production CPU instead of this 
undocumented method which from what you say is 95% reliable and here to handle 
the case of pre production CPU ?

The same problem occured on i.MX35 silicon 2.1 which where not correctly 
detected using the ROM code.

Eric

  reply	other threads:[~2010-11-04 20:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-11-02 22:17 [PATCH 1/2] ARM: imx: Add core definitions for MX53 Dinh.Nguyen at freescale.com
2010-11-02 22:17 ` Dinh.Nguyen
2010-11-02 22:17 ` [PATCH 2/2] ARM: imx: Add mx53 support to common msl functions Dinh.Nguyen at freescale.com
2010-11-02 22:17   ` Dinh.Nguyen
2010-11-02 22:21   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-11-02 22:21     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-11-03  9:15   ` Eric Bénard
2010-11-03  9:15     ` Eric Bénard
2010-11-04 19:21     ` Nguyen Dinh-R00091
2010-11-04 19:21       ` Nguyen Dinh-R00091
2010-11-04 20:30       ` Eric Bénard [this message]
2010-11-04 20:30         ` Eric Bénard
2010-11-04 21:24         ` Nguyen Dinh-R00091
2010-11-04 21:24           ` Nguyen Dinh-R00091
2010-11-04 21:30         ` Nguyen Dinh-R00091
2010-11-04 21:30           ` Nguyen Dinh-R00091

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4CD317E2.9090504@eukrea.com \
    --to=eric@eukrea.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.