From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] ARM: OMAP2+: gpmc: handle additional timings Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 04:32:17 -0700 Message-ID: <20120613113217.GK12766@atomide.com> References: <4FD63DBF.9000200@ti.com> <4FD77E35.3050703@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org ([204.13.248.72]:45425 "EHLO mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752402Ab2FMLcY (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Jun 2012 07:32:24 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: "Mohammed, Afzal" Cc: "Hunter, Jon" , "paul@pwsan.com" , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" * Mohammed, Afzal [120612 22:00]: > Hi Jon, > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 23:06:53, Hunter, Jon wrote: > > > Should you at least warn, if you are going to over-write a value? > > Yes, that would be better except for too much logging, if Tony > prefers that way I will add. If there's a chance it causing file system corruption, we should test it carefully on the boards before applying. If that's done, then there's probably no need for warnings. It's safer to disable NAND for untested boards if there's a chance of breaking the timings. Tony