Subject: [PATCH v4 14/35] mtd: rawnand: mtk: convert driver to nand_scan()

From: [email-masked] (Miquel Raynal)
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 08:49:35 +0200

Hi xiaolei,

xiaolei li <[email-masked]> wrote on Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:46:29
+0800:

> On Thu, 2018-07-26 at 08:14 +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> > On Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:06:41 +0800
> > xiaolei li <[email-masked]> wrote:
> >   
> > > On Sat, 2018-07-21 at 19:10 +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote:  
> > > > On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 17:15:06 +0200
> > > > Miquel Raynal <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > > >     
> > > > > Two helpers have been added to the core to make ECC-related
> > > > > configuration between the detection phase and the final NAND scan. Use
> > > > > these hooks and convert the driver to just use nand_scan() instead of
> > > > > both nand_scan_ident() and nand_scan_tail().
> > > > > 
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Miquel Raynal <[email-masked]>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >  drivers/mtd/nand/raw/mtk_nand.c | 75 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
> > > > >  1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
> > > > > 
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/mtk_nand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/mtk_nand.c
> > > > > index 7bc6be3f6ec0..967418f945ea 100644
> > > > > --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/mtk_nand.c
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/mtk_nand.c
> > > > > @@ -1250,13 +1250,54 @@ static int mtk_nfc_ecc_init(struct device *dev, struct mtd_info *mtd)
> > > > >  	return 0;
> > > > >  }
> > > > >  
> > > > > +static int mtk_nfc_attach_chip(struct nand_chip *chip)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > +	struct mtd_info *mtd = nand_to_mtd(chip);
> > > > > +	struct device *dev = mtd->dev.parent;
> > > > > +	struct mtk_nfc *nfc = nand_get_controller_data(chip);
> > > > > +	struct mtk_nfc_nand_chip *mtk_nand = to_mtk_nand(chip);
> > > > > +	int len;
> > > > > +	int ret;
> > > > > +
> > > > > +	if (chip->options & NAND_BUSWIDTH_16) {
> > > > > +		dev_err(dev, "16bits buswidth not supported");
> > > > > +		return -EINVAL;
> > > > > +	}
> > > > > +
> > > > > +	/* store bbt magic in page, cause OOB is not protected */
> > > > > +	if (chip->bbt_options & NAND_BBT_USE_FLASH)
> > > > > +		chip->bbt_options |= NAND_BBT_NO_OOB;
> > > > > +
> > > > > +	ret = mtk_nfc_ecc_init(dev, mtd);
> > > > > +	if (ret)
> > > > > +		return ret;
> > > > > +
> > > > > +	ret = mtk_nfc_set_spare_per_sector(&mtk_nand->spare_per_sector, mtd);
> > > > > +	if (ret)
> > > > > +		return ret;
> > > > > +
> > > > > +	mtk_nfc_set_fdm(&mtk_nand->fdm, mtd);
> > > > > +	mtk_nfc_set_bad_mark_ctl(&mtk_nand->bad_mark, mtd);
> > > > > +
> > > > > +	len = mtd->writesize + mtd->oobsize;
> > > > > +	nfc->buffer = devm_kzalloc(dev, len, GFP_KERNEL);
> > > > > +	if (!nfc->buffer)
> > > > > +		return  -ENOMEM;
> > > > > +
> > > > > +	return 0;
> > > > > +}
> > > > > +
> > > > > +static const struct nand_controller_ops mtk_nfc_controller_ops = {
> > > > > +	.attach_chip = mtk_nfc_attach_chip,
> > > > > +};
> > > > > +
> > > > >  static int mtk_nfc_nand_chip_init(struct device *dev, struct mtk_nfc *nfc,
> > > > >  				  struct device_node *np)
> > > > >  {
> > > > >  	struct mtk_nfc_nand_chip *chip;
> > > > >  	struct nand_chip *nand;
> > > > >  	struct mtd_info *mtd;
> > > > > -	int nsels, len;
> > > > > +	int nsels;
> > > > >  	u32 tmp;
> > > > >  	int ret;
> > > > >  	int i;
> > > > > @@ -1287,6 +1328,7 @@ static int mtk_nfc_nand_chip_init(struct device *dev, struct mtk_nfc *nfc,
> > > > >  
> > > > >  	nand = &chip->nand;
> > > > >  	nand->controller = &nfc->controller;
> > > > > +	nand->controller->ops = &mtk_nfc_controller_ops;    
> > > > 
> > > > Just like for the marvell driver, this assignment should be moved here
> > > > [1].     
> > > Agree to this.
> > >  
> >    
> > > > Also, it looks like this driver is open-coding
> > > > nand_controller_init(), probably something we should fix (in a separate
> > > > patch).    
> > > May I ask if you mean driver should use nand_hw_control_init helper to
> > > do controller_init?  
> > 
> > Well, now it's named nand_controller_init(), but yes, that's what I
> > meant.  
> 
> OK. I will fix it base on this patch series later.

Nice!

Then you can just wait for the next -rc1, this series should be
available.

Thanks,
Miqu?l