On 06/15/2011 02:47 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Stefano Babic,
>
Hi Wolfgang,
>
> Given that this is an exotic error case that happens only on a very
> small number of chips that are actually not supposed to exist at all,
Right, it can happen with some pre-production chips, as I understood
On 15/06/11 22:49, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Graeme Russ,
>
> In message <4df8a694.3030...@gmail.com> you wrote:
>>
>> But as Fabio has pointed out, the '2.0' in 'rev 2.0' is not srev - This
>> highlights the root of the problem - (srev == 0x20) != (rev 2.0)
>
> But everybody who spends half a
Dear Graeme Russ,
In message <4df8a694.3030...@gmail.com> you wrote:
>
> But as Fabio has pointed out, the '2.0' in 'rev 2.0' is not srev - This
> highlights the root of the problem - (srev == 0x20) != (rev 2.0)
But everybody who spends half a minute on the problem can easily
determine this, wit
Dear Stefano Babic,
In message <4df8a2de.3040...@denx.de> you wrote:
>
> > Reading rev 2.0 on Felix=B4s case is misleading IMHO as we tend to
> > think that we have a TO2.0 silicon on his board even though we get a
> > "unknown" string.
>
> Ok, so only reading the code we can know that version nu
Hi Wolfgang,
On 15/06/11 22:12, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Fabio Estevam,
>
> In message <4df89c84.7090...@freescale.com> you wrote:
> ...
>> CPU: Freescale i.MX31 rev 2.0 unknown at 531 MHz.Reset cause: WDOG
> ...
>> When the chip version is not valid, then we print:
>>
>> CPU: Freescale i.
On 06/15/2011 01:50 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> Hi Stefano,
>
Hi Fabio,
> Let me try to explain the problem I see with the current silicon
> detection mechanism:
>
> On my board (srev=0x28), which is a TO2.0 silicon I get:
>
> CPU: Freescale i.MX31 rev 2.0 at 531 MHz.Reset cause: WDOG
>
> On
Hi Graeme,
On 6/15/2011 9:08 AM, Graeme Russ wrote:
...
> Does 'srev' have a more plain language description? or would somebody
> reading that instantly know what 'srev' meant?
Yes, srev is the exact term that is found on the MX31 Reference Manual - Table
13-2
Reading Wolfgang´s message he thin
Dear Fabio Estevam,
In message <4df89c84.7090...@freescale.com> you wrote:
...
> CPU: Freescale i.MX31 rev 2.0 unknown at 531 MHz.Reset cause: WDOG
...
> When the chip version is not valid, then we print:
>
> CPU: Freescale i.MX31 (unknown rev, srev=0x20) at 531 MHz.Reset cause: WDOG
Compare
Hi Fabio,
On 15/06/11 21:50, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> Hi Stefano,
>
> On 6/15/2011 2:29 AM, Stefano Babic wrote:
> ...
>>
>> Why is the new output better as we have now ? You drop the output of
>> the srev register, and then we cannot get which strange silicon version
>> is running without patching
Hi Stefano,
On 6/15/2011 2:29 AM, Stefano Babic wrote:
...
>
> Why is the new output better as we have now ? You drop the output of
> the srev register, and then we cannot get which strange silicon version
> is running without patching the code.
Let me try to explain the problem I see with the c
On 06/14/2011 06:31 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> MX31 Reference Manual states the following possible values for the silicon
> revision:
>
Hi Fabio,
> However it is possible to find some pre-production silicon on some old
> hardware, such as MX31ADS
> that shows srev = 0x20.
>
> The following me
Dear Fabio Estevam,
In message <1308069108-5438-1-git-send-email-fabio.este...@freescale.com> you
wrote:
...
> However it is possible to find some pre-production silicon on some old
> hardware, such as MX31ADS
> that shows srev = 0x20.
>
> The following message is the currently displayed on suc
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 2:31 AM, Fabio Estevam
wrote:
> MX31 Reference Manual states the following possible values for the silicon
> revision:
>
> .srev = 0x00,
> .srev = 0x10,
> .srev = 0x11,
> .srev = 0x12,
> .srev = 0x13,
> .srev = 0x14,
> .srev = 0x15,
> .srev = 0x28,
> .srev = 0x29,
>
> Howe
13 matches
Mail list logo
