The driver is currently filling data in a wrong way, on drivers
for csrows-based memory controller, when the first layer is a
csrow.

This is not easily to notice, as, in general, memories are
filed in dual, interleaved, symetric mode, as very few memory
controllers support asymetric modes.

While digging into a bug for i82795_edac driver, the asymetric
mode there is now working, allowing us to fill the machine with
4x1GB ranks at channel 0, and 2x512GB at channel 1:

Channel 0 ranks:
EDAC DEBUG: i82975x_init_csrows: DIMM A0: from page 0x00000000 to 0x0003ffff (size: 0x00040000 pages)
EDAC DEBUG: i82975x_init_csrows: DIMM A1: from page 0x00040000 to 0x0007ffff (size: 0x00040000 pages)
EDAC DEBUG: i82975x_init_csrows: DIMM A2: from page 0x00080000 to 0x000bffff (size: 0x00040000 pages)
EDAC DEBUG: i82975x_init_csrows: DIMM A3: from page 0x000c0000 to 0x000fffff (size: 0x00040000 pages)

Channel 1 ranks:
EDAC DEBUG: i82975x_init_csrows: DIMM B0: from page 0x00100000 to 0x0011ffff (size: 0x00020000 pages)
EDAC DEBUG: i82975x_init_csrows: DIMM B1: from page 0x00120000 to 0x0013ffff (size: 0x00020000 pages)

Instead of properly showing the memories as such, before this patch, it
shows the memory layout as:

          +-----------------------------------+
          |                mc0                |
          |  csrow0   |  csrow1   |  csrow2   |
----------+-----------------------------------+
channel1: |  1024 MB  |  1024 MB  |   512 MB  |
channel0: |  1024 MB  |  1024 MB  |   512 MB  |
----------+-----------------------------------+

as if both channels were symetric, grouping the DIMMs on a wrong
layout.

After this patch, the memory is correctly represented.
So, for csrows at layers[0], it shows:

          +-----------------------------------------------+
          |                      mc0                      |
          |  csrow0   |  csrow1   |  csrow2   |  csrow3   |
----------+-----------------------------------------------+
channel1: |   512 MB  |   512 MB  |     0 MB  |     0 MB  |
channel0: |  1024 MB  |  1024 MB  |  1024 MB  |  1024 MB  |
----------+-----------------------------------------------+

For csrows at layers[1], it shows:

        +-----------------------+
        |          mc0          |
        | channel0  | channel1  |
--------+-----------------------+
csrow3: |  1024 MB  |     0 MB  |
csrow2: |  1024 MB  |     0 MB  |
--------+-----------------------+
csrow1: |  1024 MB  |   512 MB  |
csrow0: |  1024 MB  |   512 MB  |
--------+-----------------------+

So, no matter of what comes first, the information between
channel and csrow will be properly represented.
Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@redhat.com>