On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 01:24:38AM +0100, Lucas Stach wrote: > Am Dienstag, den 06.01.2015, 15:27 -0300 schrieb Ezequiel Garcia: > > On 01/04/2015 05:39 PM, Lucas Stach wrote: [...] > > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig b/drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig > > > index 7d0150d..1eafd4e 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig > > > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig > > > @@ -524,4 +524,10 @@ config MTD_NAND_SUNXI > > > help > > > Enables support for NAND Flash chips on Allwinner SoCs. > > > > > > +config MTD_NAND_TEGRA > > > + tristate "Support for NAND on NVIDIA Tegra" > > > + depends on ARCH_TEGRA || COMPILE_TEST I think you're going to need a bunch more dependencies if you use COMPILE_TEST. Otherwise we're going to get all kinds of build failure reports. > > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/tegra_nand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/tegra_nand.c [...] > > > +struct tegra_nand { > > > + void __iomem *regs; > > > + int irq; > > > > Seems like you don't need to store irq. > > > > > + struct clk *clk; > > > + struct reset_control *rst; > > > + int wp_gpio; > > > + int buswidth; > > > > And also you don't seem to need either wp_gpio or buswidth stored > > in the struct. You only use them at probe time. > > > > I'll keep the wp_gpio, as I still hope to use this to WP the NAND when > no write is pending. I'll fix the others. Maybe use the gpiod_*() API since the old one is new deprecated? > > > +static const struct of_device_id tegra_nand_of_match[] = { > > > + { .compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-nand" }, > > > + { .compatible = "nvidia,tegra30-nand" }, > > > > AFAIK, having two compatible strings, but making no distinction between > > them is typically frowned upon by devicetree maintainers. > > > > Is the controller any different in tegra20 and tegra30? > > > > If you are not sure about the controllers being different, you can > > try the following approach. The devicetree is written like this: > > > > nand@foo { > > compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-nand", "nvidia,tegra-nand"; > > }; > > > > So you only deal with "nvidia,tegra-nand" in the driver, yet the > > devicetree files are prepared to deal with a difference. I think it's been more common to have something like this: tegra20.dtsi: nand-controller@70008000 { compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-nand"; ... }; tegra30.dtsi: nand-controller@70008000 { compatible = "nvidia,tegra30-nand", "nvidia,tegra20-nand"; ... }; The idea being that if the Tegra30 variant is indeed compatible with the Tegra20 variant, the driver can match on "nvidia,tegra20-nand". But at the same time the DTB has the more specific compatible in case the driver ever needs to handle generation-specific quirks, or implement any additional functionality added in Tegra30 that wasn't available in early generations. > I believe that tegra30-nand is actually a bit different from tegra20 (at > least on more clock I know about), but obviously this driver doesn't > handle those differences and I don't know if I ever get to see Tegra30 > hardware with NAND. Given that I think it's best to just remove the > tegra30-nand compatible for now and add it back if someone has hardware > to test with. Yes, that sounds like the best option for now. Thierry
Attachment:
pgp4kFJ62Y86Z.pgp
Description: PGP signature