On 07/07/2016 04:49 PM, Daniel Walker wrote: > On 07/07/2016 02:23 PM, Scott Wood wrote: >> >> I suspect that add the usage of cspr_ext into the driver would fix the >> issue we have. It reads like you would find that acceptable ? >> What specifically is the problem you're having? Is it that CSPR_EXT is >> not getting written to, and thus the device does not appear at the >> address that it should? >> >> Or is the driver matching incorrectly? The only way the driver's lack >> of using CSPR_EXT to match would be a problem would be if you have >> multiple chipselects with the same address in the lower 32 bits, and >> only CSPR_EXT distinguishing them. Since you proposed a device tree >> binding that assumes all devices have the same CSPR_EXT, I doubt that's >> the case, so I doubt adding CSPR_EXT matching to the driver will solve >> your problem. >> >> -Scott >> > > I didn't do the debug on this. From my perspective it's either flash > works, or it doesn't work. We need the code below for it to work,
Adding CSPR_EXT matching to the driver will not accomplish the same thing as that code. -Scott _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
