>>-----Original Message----- >>From: Gopinath, Thara >>Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 12:33 PM >>To: 'felipe.ba...@nokia.com' >>Cc: Samuel Ortiz; linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; linux-omap@vger.kernel.org; >>Tony Lindgren; Andrew >>Morton >>Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/4] mfd: twl-core: switch over to defines in twl.h >> >> >> >>>>-----Original Message----- >>>>From: Felipe Balbi [mailto:felipe.ba...@nokia.com] >>>>Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 12:29 PM >>>>To: Gopinath, Thara >>>>Cc: Balbi Felipe (Nokia-MS/Helsinki); Samuel Ortiz; >>>>linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; linux- >>>>o...@vger.kernel.org; Tony Lindgren; Andrew Morton >>>>Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] mfd: twl-core: switch over to defines in twl.h >>>> >>>>On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 08:32:57AM +0200, ext Gopinath, Thara wrote: >>>>>R_PROTECT_KEY offset is 0xE where as the new TWL4030_PM_MASTER_PROTECT_KEY >>>>>is defined as 0xd. I have not checked the trm to see which is correct. But >>>> >>>>you can use either 0xc0|0x0c or 0xce|0xec, both will work are unlock >>>>keys. >> >>No I am not talking about the key values. I was talking about the register >>offset >>for TWL4030_PM_MASTER_PROTECT_KEY. My question is, is it ok for it to be 0xd >>or 0xe. >>Earlier we were using 0xd and in the new implementation it has been changed >>to 0xe.
Typo. Earlier we were using 0xe and in the new implementation it has been changed to 0xd. Regards Thara -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
