[U-Boot] [PATCH] powerpc/mpc8xxx: reword max tCKmin message
Reword "The DIMM max tCKmin is" to "The combined tCKmin is". It means the max tCKmin across all DIMMs on the same controller.
Signed-off-by: York Sun yorksun@freescale.com --- .../cpu/mpc8xxx/ddr/lc_common_dimm_params.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc8xxx/ddr/lc_common_dimm_params.c b/arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc8xxx/ddr/lc_common_dimm_params.c index 00f3d6c..f6c1302 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc8xxx/ddr/lc_common_dimm_params.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc8xxx/ddr/lc_common_dimm_params.c @@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ compute_cas_latency_ddr3(const dimm_params_t *dimm_params, } /* validate if the memory clk is in the range of dimms */ if (mclk_ps < tCKmin_X_ps) { - printf("The DIMM max tCKmin is %d ps," + printf("The combined minimum tCKmin is %d ps," "doesn't support the MCLK cycle %d ps\n", tCKmin_X_ps, mclk_ps); return 1;
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 8:51 PM, York Sun yorksun@freescale.com wrote:
- printf("The DIMM max tCKmin is %d ps,"
- printf("The combined minimum tCKmin is %d ps,"
"doesn't support the MCLK cycle %d ps\n",
That still needs some work, IMHO. I think you might need the word "which" before "doesn't". However, even with that, it's not clear what's wrong. Where does the bad value of "mclk_ps" come from?
On Mon, 2011-05-02 at 20:19 -0700, Tabi Timur-B04825 wrote:
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 8:51 PM, York Sun yorksun@freescale.com wrote:
printf("The DIMM max tCKmin is %d ps,"
printf("The combined minimum tCKmin is %d ps," "doesn't support the MCLK cycle %d ps\n",That still needs some work, IMHO. I think you might need the word "which" before "doesn't". However, even with that, it's not clear what's wrong. Where does the bad value of "mclk_ps" come from?
It happens when the actually DDR clock is faster than the slowest DIMM can support.
York
On May 2, 2011, at 10:40 PM, York Sun wrote:
On Mon, 2011-05-02 at 20:19 -0700, Tabi Timur-B04825 wrote:
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 8:51 PM, York Sun yorksun@freescale.com wrote:
printf("The DIMM max tCKmin is %d ps,"
printf("The combined minimum tCKmin is %d ps," "doesn't support the MCLK cycle %d ps\n",That still needs some work, IMHO. I think you might need the word "which" before "doesn't". However, even with that, it's not clear what's wrong. Where does the bad value of "mclk_ps" come from?
It happens when the actually DDR clock is faster than the slowest DIMM can support.
York
Did you guys agree on wording? Is the patch ok or needs changing?
- k
Kumar Gala wrote:
That still needs some work, IMHO. I think you might need the word "which" before "doesn't". However, even with that, it's not clear what's wrong. Where does the bad value of "mclk_ps" come from?
It happens when the actually DDR clock is faster than the slowest DIMM can support.
York
Did you guys agree on wording? Is the patch ok or needs changing?
I haven't seen an updated patch from York. I'd like to see the addition of text like, "It happens when the actually DDR clock is faster than the slowest DIMM can support." People need to know what to fix, not just what's wrong.
Also, %d is for signed integers, not unsigned.
On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 10:04 -0500, Timur Tabi wrote:
Kumar Gala wrote:
That still needs some work, IMHO. I think you might need the word "which" before "doesn't". However, even with that, it's not clear what's wrong. Where does the bad value of "mclk_ps" come from?
It happens when the actually DDR clock is faster than the slowest DIMM can support.
York
Did you guys agree on wording? Is the patch ok or needs changing?
I haven't seen an updated patch from York. I'd like to see the addition of text like, "It happens when the actually DDR clock is faster than the slowest DIMM can support." People need to know what to fix, not just what's wrong.
Also, %d is for signed integers, not unsigned.
I will update the patch according to Timur's suggestion.
York
participants (4)
-
Kumar Gala -
Tabi Timur-B04825 -
Timur Tabi
-
York Sun