[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4278198.vlhjLe5TOR@z50>
Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2018 15:55:25 +0200
From: Janusz Krzysztofik <jmkrzyszt@...il.com>
To: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...tlin.com>
Cc: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@...il.com>,
linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Janusz Krzysztofik <jmkrzyszt@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mtd: rawnand: ams-delta: use ->exec_op()
On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 2:30:54 PM CEST Boris Brezillon wrote:
> Hi Janusz,
>
> On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 14:00:28 +0200
> Janusz Krzysztofik <jmkrzyszt@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > Replace legacy callbacks with ->select_chip() and ->exec_op().
>
> Thanks for working on that, that's really appreciated.
>
> >
> > Implementation of NAND_OP_WAITRDY_INSTR has been based on legacy
> > nand_wait_ready(),
>
> I don't remember what the ams-delta ->dev_ready()/->waitfunc() hooks
> are doing, but is shouldn't be too hard to replace them by an
> ams_delta_wait_ready() func.
Default nand_wait() is used as ->waitfunc(), and ->dev_ready() returns R/B
GPIO pin status.
> > otherwise that function would probabaly have to be
>
> ^ probably
Do you think other drivers which now provide ->dev_ready() won't require
reimplementation of nand_wait_ready()?
> > reimplemented inside the driver. Hence, legacy callback ->dev_ready()
> > is still used.
> >
> > Use of IO_ADDR_R and IO_ADDR_W legacy structure members will be dropped
> > later, as soon as the driver is converted to use GPIO API for data I/O.
>
> In the meantime, can you move the iomem pointer to the ams_delta
> private struct so that this driver no longer uses the ->IO_ADDR_R/W
> fields?
OK
> >
> > Suggested-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...tlin.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Janusz Krzysztofik <jmkrzyszt@...il.com>
> > ---
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've not tested the change on hardware yet as I'm not sure if:
> > - handling of NCE limited to that inside ->select_chip() is
> > sufficient,
>
> I think it is.
>
> > - releasing ALE / CLE immediately after ams_delta_write_buf() is
> > correct.
>
> Well, you should probably consider waiting for instr->ctx.delay_ns
> nanoseconds after each instruction, but, if it was working before the
> conversion to ->exec_op(), it should work just fine now.
OK, I'll give it a try.
Thanks,
Janusz
Powered by blists - more mailing lists