From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Graeme Russ <graeme.russ@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 22:33:24 +1000
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx31: Improve the handling of
 unidentified	silicon version
In-Reply-To: <20110615121255.7C251172A6A7@gemini.denx.de>
References: <1308069108-5438-1-git-send-email-fabio.estevam@freescale.com>	<4DF8434F.2040205@denx.de>
	<4DF89C84.7090605@freescale.com>
	<20110615121255.7C251172A6A7@gemini.denx.de>
Message-ID: <4DF8A694.3030208@gmail.com>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

Hi Wolfgang,

On 15/06/11 22:12, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Fabio Estevam,
> 
> In message <4DF89C84.7090605@freescale.com> you wrote:
> ...
>> CPU:   Freescale i.MX31 rev 2.0 unknown at 531 MHz.Reset cause: WDOG
> ...
>> When the chip version is not valid, then we print:
>>
>> CPU:   Freescale i.MX31 (unknown rev, srev=0x20) at 531 MHz.Reset cause: WDOG
> 
> Compare to the current line above - which new information do you
> print?  None.  You just print it in a new format, and with more
> characters, i. e. with a worse SNR.
> 
>> Please let me know what you think about this proposal.
> 
> You received 3 messages from 3 different guys who told you all the
> same: just leave the code as is.  Your proposed changes are not
> considered an improvement.

But as Fabio has pointed out, the '2.0' in 'rev 2.0' is not srev - This
highlights the root of the problem - (srev == 0x20) != (rev 2.0)

Regards,

Graeme