* Mohammed, Afzal <afzal@xxxxxx> [120613 05:43]: > Hi Tony, > > On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 17:02:17, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > * Mohammed, Afzal <afzal@xxxxxx> [120612 22:00]: > > > 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. > > By disabling NAND, I understand that you are suggesting to remove > nand initialization done in board file, right ? Yes, but before we do that, let's fix things first for cases that we can test, like tusb6010 DMA. > And boards that can be tested here are omap3evm & beagleboard, > both of which can't be tested for this change. > > Or should additional timings be achieved without affecting old > interface, but that it seems would necessitate more code > duplication. We should just keep the same timings as before, with values added for the newly added registers. Regards, Tony -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
