Hi Ezequiel,
Dragging up an old piece of the conversation, but I think this
highlights some of the difficulty we're still having. Perhaps I should
have headed this off a month ago...
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 08:19:57PM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 09:18:53PM +,
From: Ezequiel Garcia [mailto:ezequiel.gar...@free-electrons.com]
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 09:18:53PM +, Gupta, Pekon wrote:
I'm not sure, of course, but I don't see why not. It's more likely to
break for x16 than it is for x8.
Another question here is ..
The above patch
On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 08:54:56PM +, Gupta, Pekon wrote:
From: Ezequiel Garcia [mailto:ezequiel.gar...@free-electrons.com]
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 09:18:53PM +, Gupta, Pekon wrote:
I'm not sure, of course, but I don't see why not. It's more likely to
break for x16 than it
From: Ezequiel Garcia
[...]
But: on the other hand, I'd really like you to convince me as to
why is it so bad to require the DTB to have the proper GPMC bus width.
No its not at all bad, all I want is either of the one way (not mixture of
both).
- Either depend on DT completely (which is
On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 10:00:09PM +, Gupta, Pekon wrote:
From: Ezequiel Garcia
[...]
But: on the other hand, I'd really like you to convince me as to
why is it so bad to require the DTB to have the proper GPMC bus width.
No its not at all bad, all I want is either of the one way
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 06:53:07AM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
As it was discussed recently in the mailing list, the omap2-nand driver
currently
has an issue preventing proper ONFI detection of 16-bit devices (other drivers
may suffer from this same issue).
First of all, thanks for
Hi Brian, Ezequiel Garcia,
Some replies to your queries...
From: Brian Norris [mailto:computersforpe...@gmail.com]
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 06:53:07AM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
[...]
I do have one curiosity here: omap2.c looks like it's essentially
defaulting to the NAND_OMAP_POLLED
Pekon,
Let me answer this one alone, given it's an important question.
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 09:18:53PM +, Gupta, Pekon wrote:
I'm not sure, of course, but I don't see why not. It's more likely to
break for x16 than it is for x8.
Another question here is ..
The above patch
