On Fri, 19 Oct 2018 15:29:05 +0800 Liang Yang <liang.yang@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > How about defining that the HW returns an array of __le64 instead and then > > define the following macros which you can use after converting in the > > CPU endianness > > > > #define ECC_GET_PROTECTED_OOB_BYTE(x, y) (((x) >> (8 * (1 + y)) & GENMASK(7, 0)) > > #define ECC_COMPLETE BIT(31) > > #define ECC_ERR_CNT(x) (((x) >> 24) & GENMASK(5, 0)) > > > > (I'm not entirely sure the field positions are correct, but I'll let you > > check that). > > > ok. i think it should be: > > #define ECC_GET_PROTECTED_OOB_BYTE(x, y) (((x) >> (8 * y) & > GENMASK(7, 0)) > > if x represents the u64 and y represents the index of the u64. Absolutely. > > > > >> + > >> +#define PER_INFO_BYTE (sizeof(struct meson_nfc_info_format)) > >> + > >> +struct meson_nfc_nand_chip { > >> + struct list_head node; > >> + struct nand_chip nand; > >> + bool is_scramble; > > > > I think I already mentioned the NAND_NEED_SCRAMBLING flag []. Please > > drop this field and test (chip->flags & NAND_NEED_SCRAMBLING) instead. > > > em, i use NAND_NEED_SCRAMBLING and is_scramble is set: > static int meson_nand_attach_chip(struct nand_chip *nand) > { > ...... > meson_chip->is_scramble = > (nand->options & NAND_NEED_SCRAMBLING) ? 1 : 0; > ...... > } Why do you need to add a new field then? Just test nand->options & NAND_NEED_SCRAMBLING directly or provide a helper function that does that. ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/