On Tue, 24 Sep 2019 07:46:18 +0000 <Tudor.Ambarus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > From: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > static int write_enable(struct spi_nor *nor) > static int write_disable(struct spi_nor *nor) > become > static int spi_nor_write_enable(struct spi_nor *nor) > static int spi_nor_write_disable(struct spi_nor *nor) > > Check for errors after each call to them. Move them up in the > file as the first SPI NOR Register Operations, to avoid further > forward declarations. Same here, split that in 3 patches please. > > Signed-off-by: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c | 175 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------- > 1 file changed, 120 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c > index 0fb124bd2e77..0aee068a5835 100644 > --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c > +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c > @@ -389,6 +389,64 @@ static ssize_t spi_nor_write_data(struct spi_nor *nor, loff_t to, size_t len, > } > > /** > + * spi_nor_write_enable() - Set write enable latch with Write Enable command. > + * @nor: pointer to 'struct spi_nor' > + * > + * Return: 0 on success, -errno otherwise. > + */ > +static int spi_nor_write_enable(struct spi_nor *nor) > +{ > + int ret; > + > + if (nor->spimem) { > + struct spi_mem_op op = > + SPI_MEM_OP(SPI_MEM_OP_CMD(SPINOR_OP_WREN, 1), > + SPI_MEM_OP_NO_ADDR, > + SPI_MEM_OP_NO_DUMMY, > + SPI_MEM_OP_NO_DATA); > + > + ret = spi_mem_exec_op(nor->spimem, &op); > + } else { > + ret = nor->controller_ops->write_reg(nor, SPINOR_OP_WREN, > + NULL, 0); > + } > + > + if (ret) > + dev_err(nor->dev, "error %d on Write Enable\n", ret); Do we really need these error messages? I mean, if there's an error it should be propagated to the upper layer, so maybe we should use dev_dbg() here. > + > + return ret; > +} > + ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/