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
