On 28.10.2015 18:30, Pankaj Dubey wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Wednesday 28 October 2015 12:54 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 28.10.2015 16:06, Pavel Fedin wrote:
>>> Hello!
>>>
>>>>> + sromc: sromc@12250000 {
>>>>> + compatible = "samsung,exynos-srom";
>>>>> + reg = <0x12250000 0x10>;
>>>>
>>>> Isn't 0x10 too small (SROM_BC3 won't be mapped)?
>>>
>>> Muhaha, indeed, thanks for noticing this.
>>> By the way, i've just checked exynos4.dtsi and exynos5.dtsi, they
>>> specify the same size. Did reviewers overlook this small thing?
>>
>> Yep, I pointed that 0x100 (from first version of patchset) is too big...
>> but did not exactly check the length of new value.
>>
>
> Yes, once you pointed out I checked UM for Exynos4415, Exynos5250,
> Exynos5420 and Exynos5410 and all these manuals talks about SROM_BC{0-3}
> only. There is no offset such as SROM_BC{4,5} at least in these SoC
> manuals. Accordingly I modified size from 0x100 to 0x10. But looks like
> I missed to remove SROM_BC{{4,5} from exynos-srom.h. I checked only
> these registers are used in the driver, so as such it should not cause
> any issue in driver as of now, only we have some redundant entry in
> exynos-srom.h which can be removed if it's not applicable for any of
> Exynos SoC, after confirmation from Kukjin.
I was not referring to SROM_BC[45] but to SROM_BC3 which has the offset
of 0x10.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
