Hi Rajeshwari, On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.t...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for your response. > > On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Rajeshwari Birje > <rajeshwari.bi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi Jagan, >> >> Hope following reply answer your query. >> >> On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 2:08 AM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.t...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Any update on this, is this a different part w.r.t what I refer for? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Jagan. >>> >>> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.t...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> Hi Rajeshwari, >>>> >>>> + { >>>> + .id = 0x5014, >>>> >>>> is this id code is correct? it seems like 0x4014 >> When you see the datasheet of W25Q80BW page 16, the table says its 5014h >>>> >>>> + .nr_blocks = 128, >>>> >>>> nr_blocks must be 16 i think? >> We use W25Q80BW which is 8MB, hence it is correct as per following >> calculation; >> flash->size = 4096 * 16 * params->nr_blocks; > > Yes, it is 8M-BIT so the nr_blocks should be 16 to calculate the flash > size as 1Mbyte. > > -- > Thanks, > Jagan. > >>>> >>>> + .name = "W25Q80", >>>> + }, >>>> }; >>>> >>>> Honestly the commit message itself is wrong, i guess. >> Yes this I agree is my fault, but wonder how it went in through all the >> reviews.
1. Can you please revert this patch, as commit message not looks good me and also some incorrect nr_blocks Please mentioned the exact details on commit message body "reason for reverting" 2. And also send one more patch with a proper details. [exact name, nr_blocks .etc] --- Thanks, Jagan. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot