Hello Nicolas and Peter, On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 05:04:25PM +0100, Nicolas Ferre wrote: > Le 26/01/2015 16:58, Peter Rosin a écrit : > > Sylvain Rochet wrote: > >> Hello Nicolas, > >> > >> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 02:34:38PM +0100, Nicolas Ferre wrote: > >>> Le 26/01/2015 11:36, Sylvain Rochet a écrit : > >>>> > >>>> I think we should explain we are dealing with an errata here, this > >>>> is not obvious at first sight, the patch summary may find its place > >>>> here :-) > >>> > >>> True but the problem is that this errata is not public yet, it will be > >>> in a couple of weeks. > >>> > >>> I have the feeling though that the commit message is pretty clear. > >>> We'll maybe add that it"s an actual errata. > >> > >> Humm, this is not what I meant actually. I only proposed a code source > >> comment explaining why this is done this way, the current patch summary > >> looked like it will be perfect between /* */ ;-) > > > > I did not want to fill up the source with wordy comments, and settled > > for a one-liner. I don't know much about the underlying reasons other > > than the fact that LPDDR1 mode of the controller isn't working properly > > in self-refresh and that the DDR2 spec is similar enough to work. > > > > The one-liner comment says about the same thing, but not with so > > many words. The comment does make it clear that the switch to DDR2 > > is intentional, and that is all that is needed as protection from some > > future cleanup. I mean, anyone seeing that comment and just erasing > > the whole thing without further investigation is not doing a very good > > job as there is no reason to intentionally switch from LPDDR1 mode to > > DDR2 mode, other that the fact that the LPDDR1 mode isn't working for > > some reason. That reason is not to be found in the commit message > > and I have no information to improve the situation. IMO, the only thing > > missing is a pointer to the as yet unreleased errata, which should explain > > the situation clearly for any and all interested parties. May I suggest that > > someone who cares sends a patch with the comment update when the > > errata is released? > > That's the option that I'll take. > > Let's go for it (and anyone remind me if I don't when the errata is > released).
I fully agree with that, a pointer to a datasheet errata is exactly the same thing as explaining the issue. Sylvain -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
