Re[3]: [PATCH 1/1] Revert "nand_base: detect more ONFI flash"

2013-05-15 Thread Alexander Shiyan
> > > > > > On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 10:21:39PM +0200, Jean-Christophe > > > > > > PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > > > > > >> this brake the nand support on at91sam9x5ek > > > > > >> where we have a non compliant ONFI nand > > > > > >> NAND device: Manufacturer ID: 0xad, Chip ID: 0xda (Hynix NAND > > >

Re[2]: [PATCH 1/1] Revert "nand_base: detect more ONFI flash"

2013-05-15 Thread Alexander Shiyan
> > > > > On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 10:21:39PM +0200, Jean-Christophe > > > > > PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > > > > >> this brake the nand support on at91sam9x5ek > > > > >> where we have a non compliant ONFI nand > > > > >> NAND device: Manufacturer ID: 0xad, Chip ID: 0xda (Hynix NAND 256MiB > > > > >

Re: [PATCH 1/1] Revert "nand_base: detect more ONFI flash"

2013-05-15 Thread Sascha Hauer
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 10:46:13AM +0400, Alexander Shiyan wrote: > > > > On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 10:21:39PM +0200, Jean-Christophe > > > > PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > > > >> this brake the nand support on at91sam9x5ek > > > >> where we have a non compliant ONFI nand > > > >> NAND device: Manufactur

Re[2]: [PATCH 1/1] Revert "nand_base: detect more ONFI flash"

2013-05-14 Thread Alexander Shiyan
> > > On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 10:21:39PM +0200, Jean-Christophe > > > PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > > >> this brake the nand support on at91sam9x5ek > > >> where we have a non compliant ONFI nand > > >> NAND device: Manufacturer ID: 0xad, Chip ID: 0xda (Hynix NAND 256MiB > > >> 3,3V 8-bit), 256MiB, p

Re: [PATCH 1/1] Revert "nand_base: detect more ONFI flash"

2013-05-08 Thread Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
On 18:25 Wed 08 May , Eric Bénard wrote: > Hi Jean-Christophe, > > Le Wed, 8 May 2013 15:30:24 +0800, > Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD a écrit : > > > > > On May 8, 2013, at 1:11 PM, Sascha Hauer wrote: > > > > > On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 10:21:39PM +0200, Jean-Christophe > > > PLAGNIOL-

Re: [PATCH 1/1] Revert "nand_base: detect more ONFI flash"

2013-05-08 Thread Eric Bénard
Hi Jean-Christophe, Le Wed, 8 May 2013 15:30:24 +0800, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD a écrit : > > On May 8, 2013, at 1:11 PM, Sascha Hauer wrote: > > > On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 10:21:39PM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD > > wrote: > >> this brake the nand support on at91sam9x5ek >

Re: [PATCH 1/1] Revert "nand_base: detect more ONFI flash"

2013-05-08 Thread Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
On May 8, 2013, at 1:11 PM, Sascha Hauer wrote: > On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 10:21:39PM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD > wrote: >> this brake the nand support on at91sam9x5ek >> where we have a non compliant ONFI nand >> NAND device: Manufacturer ID: 0xad, Chip ID: 0xda (Hynix NAND 256MiB

Re: [PATCH 1/1] Revert "nand_base: detect more ONFI flash"

2013-05-07 Thread Sascha Hauer
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 10:21:39PM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > this brake the nand support on at91sam9x5ek > where we have a non compliant ONFI nand > NAND device: Manufacturer ID: 0xad, Chip ID: 0xda (Hynix NAND 256MiB 3,3V > 8-bit), 256MiB, page size: 2048, OOB size: 64 >

[PATCH 1/1] Revert "nand_base: detect more ONFI flash"

2013-05-07 Thread Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
this brake the nand support on at91sam9x5ek where we have a non compliant ONFI nand NAND device: Manufacturer ID: 0xad, Chip ID: 0xda (Hynix NAND 256MiB 3,3V 8-bit), 256MiB, page size: 2048, OOB size: 64 This reverts commit 4c2bdc8728016b3412523e3264651651fe752860. Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe