Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932655Ab1CXRra (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Mar 2011 13:47:30 -0400 Received: from mail-ew0-f46.google.com ([209.85.215.46]:63172 "EHLO mail-ew0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756004Ab1CXRr2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Mar 2011 13:47:28 -0400 Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:47:23 +0000 From: Jamie Iles To: Mike Frysinger Cc: Jamie Iles , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@suse.de Subject: Re: [RFC PATCHv2 0/4] Support for OTP memory Message-ID: <20110324174722.GH3130@pulham.picochip.com> References: <1300980071-24645-1-git-send-email-jamie@jamieiles.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1606 Lines: 39 Hi Mike, On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 01:39:56PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 11:21, Jamie Iles wrote: > > Following some feedback from Greg, I've updated this series to be more > > of a generic OTP layer. ?Everything is now registered under the "otp" > > bus and I've also converted the blackfin OTP driver to use this > > framework (which is the only current OTP driver I could find). > > really, i'm the only one who wrote a driver ? that's boring. Yes, and I'm quite surprised at that. Perhaps I've missed some. > i guess this isnt trying to handle OTP stuff that exists in the MTD > layer already ? No, I believe that the OTP stuff in the MTD layer is where some flash chips have a small section that can be write protected so it's more like a permanent write disable to that sector whereas the thing I'm looking at is on a per-bit basis. I did have a look at if there was some kind of way to fit this stuff into the MTD layer but it felt like it was really shoehorning it in. > > Mike, I wasn't 100% sure how big the blackfin OTP is but I found a > > datasheet talking about 64KB so I've assumed that for now. > > the datasheets say 64K *bits* :). i think all our datasheets tend to > use bits rather than bytes because they're stupid and bigger numbers > always means better parts ! That sounds very familiar! Jamie -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/