Le 29/01/2014 18:56, Jason Gunthorpe a écrit :
On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 03:34:18PM +0100, Boris BREZILLON wrote:
+static int sunxi_nand_chip_init_timings(struct sunxi_nand_chip *chip,
+ struct device_node *np)
+{
+ const struct nand_sdr_timings *timings;
+ u32 min_clk_period = 0;
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = onfi_get_async_timing_mode(&chip->nand);
+ if (ret == ONFI_TIMING_MODE_UNKNOWN) {
+ ret = of_get_nand_onfi_timing_mode(np);
+ if (ret < 0)
+ return ret;
+ }
[..]
+static int sunxi_nand_chip_init(struct device *dev, struct sunxi_nfc *nfc,
[..]
+ ret = sunxi_nand_chip_init_timings(chip, np);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
[..]
+ ret = nand_scan_ident(mtd, nsels, NULL);
This ordering looks a bit problematic, will onfi_get_async_timing_mode
ever return anything other than ONFI_TIMING_MODE_UNKNOWN if it is
called before nand_scan_ident ?
Indeed. I haven't tested this part as I don't own any board with an ONFI
compatible chip.
What sets clk_rate to non-zero if there
is no DT property?
It is set to 20 MHz by default, but it should definitely be set to the
rate fulfilling mode 0.
I'll fix this.
For a flow that uses onfi_get_async_timing_mode rather than DT the
driver should set the interface to timing mode 0 (slowest) and then
call nand_scan_ident, and then reset the interface to the detected
timing mode.
Absolutely.
Maybe this should be implemented in the core code through a new
callback (nand->set_timing_mode ?)
Regards,
Jason
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
