On 2015-03-25 17:28:24 [+0100], Stefan Agner wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/vf610_nfc.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/vf610_nfc.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..23c1510
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/vf610_nfc.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,686 @@
…
> +static inline u32 vf610_nfc_read(struct vf610_nfc *nfc, uint reg)
> +{
> + return readl(nfc->regs + reg);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void vf610_nfc_write(struct vf610_nfc *nfc, uint reg, u32 val)
> +{
> + writel(val, nfc->regs + reg);
> +}
…
> +static void vf610_nfc_send_command(struct vf610_nfc *nfc, u32 cmd_byte1,
> + u32 cmd_code)
> +{
> + void __iomem *reg = nfc->regs + NFC_FLASH_CMD2;
> + u32 tmp;
> +
> + vf610_nfc_clear_status(nfc);
> +
> + tmp = __raw_readl(reg);
> + tmp &= ~(CMD_BYTE1_MASK | CMD_CODE_MASK | BUFNO_MASK);
> + tmp |= cmd_byte1 << CMD_BYTE1_SHIFT;
> + tmp |= cmd_code << CMD_CODE_SHIFT;
> + __raw_writel(tmp, reg);
> +}
Why readl() vs __raw_readl() dito for write?
vf610_nfc_{read|write} is good since for PPC we would need out_be32()
here instead.
It would be nice if you could abstract the __raw_ once as well. And I am
not sure if you need those at all since the former functions should work
here just fine.
Sebastian
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
