Ok, I now understand your suggestion. I still think the kernel naming is confusing since it does not match internal Freescale naming, but of course that only exists in Redboot source so I suppose it does not matter.
About your 5121 question, it is Freescale internal version 1.1 or using the kernel convention 2_1. On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Fabio Estevam <fabioeste...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Hi John, > > --- On Wed, 1/13/10, John Rigby <jcri...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> From: John Rigby <jcri...@gmail.com> >> Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 4/9] Nand mxc_nand add v1.1 controller support >> To: "Fabio Estevam" <fabioeste...@yahoo.com> >> Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de >> Date: Wednesday, January 13, 2010, 2:50 PM >> Fabio, >> >> Thanks for the input but there is a problem with your >> suggestion. The >> kernel driver is in error. I don't believe the driver >> as is will even >> work on i.MX25. The register layout is wrong. I >> can't go into all >> the details here but two quick examples I found are: > > I am not talking about kernel driver functionality here. Only NAND controller > revision naming. > > ... > >> My understanding is that there really are 4 versions of the >> nfc ip 1, >> 1.1, 2 and 2.1. The kernel driver is over simplifying >> the issue. > > Are these NFC revision numbers for Freescale Power Architecture devices, such > as MPC5121? > > This is how the Freescale kernel names the NFC for different i.MX devices: > > CONFIG_ARCH_MXC_HAS_NFC_V2_1 (For MX25 and MX35) > CONFIG_ARCH_MXC_HAS_NFC_V3_1 (For MX37) > CONFIG_ARCH_MXC_HAS_NFC_V3_2 (For MX51) > CONFIG_ARCH_MXC_HAS_NFC_V1 (For MX27 and MX31) > > Regards, > > Fabio Estevam > > > > > > _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
