[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220517160226.4107f282@xps-13>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2022 16:02:26 +0200
From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
To: Pratyush Yadav <p.yadav@...com>
Cc: Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, Tero Kristo <kristo@...nel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>,
Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla@...com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/6] mtd: spi-nor: core: run calibration when
initialization is done
Hi Pratyush,
p.yadav@...com wrote on Fri, 12 Mar 2021 00:42:13 +0530:
> Once the flash is initialized tell the controller it can run
> calibration procedures if needed. This can be useful when calibration is
> needed to run at higher clock speeds.
>
> Signed-off-by: Pratyush Yadav <p.yadav@...com>
> ---
> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c | 12 ++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c
> index 88888df009f0..e0cbcaf1be89 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c
> @@ -3650,6 +3650,7 @@ static int spi_nor_probe(struct spi_mem *spimem)
> * checking what's really supported using spi_mem_supports_op().
> */
> const struct spi_nor_hwcaps hwcaps = { .mask = SNOR_HWCAPS_ALL };
> + struct spi_mem_op op;
> char *flash_name;
> int ret;
>
> @@ -3709,8 +3710,15 @@ static int spi_nor_probe(struct spi_mem *spimem)
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> - return mtd_device_register(&nor->mtd, data ? data->parts : NULL,
> - data ? data->nr_parts : 0);
> + ret = mtd_device_register(&nor->mtd, data ? data->parts : NULL,
> + data ? data->nr_parts : 0);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + op = spi_nor_spimem_get_read_op(nor);
Isn't this too specific? I really don't know much about spi-nors, but I
find odd to have this op being created here, why not moving this into
the _do_calibration() helper?
> + spi_mem_do_calibration(nor->spimem, &op);
A warning/info upon calibration error (not on the absence of the hook)
would be nice?
> +
> + return 0;
> }
>
> static int spi_nor_remove(struct spi_mem *spimem)
Otherwise I like the overall idea.
Thanks,
Miquèl
Powered by blists - more mailing lists