On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 3:31 AM, Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Looks good, just one comment below.
>
> * Govindraj.R <govindraj.raja@xxxxxx> [091204 05:37]:
>> From: Vimal Singh <vimalsingh@xxxxxx>
>> Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 18:23:15 +0530
>> Subject: [PATCH] Introducing 'gpmc-nand.c' for GPMC specific NAND init
>>
>> Introducing 'gpmc-nand.c' for GPMC specific NAND init.
>> For example: GPMC timing parameters and all.
>> This patch also migrates gpmc related calls from 'nand/omap2.c'
>> to 'gpmc-nand.c'.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vimal Singh <vimalsingh@xxxxxx>
>> ---
>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/Makefile | 3 +
>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/gpmc-nand.c | 141 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/nand.h | 6 ++
>> drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c | 26 +-----
>> 4 files changed, 153 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>> create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-omap2/gpmc-nand.c
>
> <snip>
>
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/gpmc-nand.c
>
> <snip>
>
>> +int __init gpmc_nand_init(struct omap_nand_platform_data *_nand_data)
>> +{
>> + unsigned int val;
>> + int err = 0;
>> + struct device *dev = &gpmc_nand_device.dev;
>> +
>> + gpmc_nand_data = _nand_data;
>> + gpmc_nand_data->nand_setup = gpmc_nand_setup;
>> + gpmc_nand_device.dev.platform_data = gpmc_nand_data;
>> +
>> + err = gpmc_nand_setup(gpmc_nand_data->gpmc_cs_baseaddr);
>> + if (err < 0) {
>> + dev_err(dev, "NAND platform setup failed: %d\n", err);
>> + return err;
>> + }
>> +
>> + /* Enable RD PIN Monitoring Reg */
>> + if (gpmc_nand_data->dev_ready) {
>> + val = gpmc_cs_read_reg(gpmc_nand_data->cs,
>> + GPMC_CS_CONFIG1);
>> + val |= WR_RD_PIN_MONITORING;
>> + gpmc_cs_write_reg(gpmc_nand_data->cs,
>> + GPMC_CS_CONFIG1, val);
>> + }
>
> Above looks OK..
>
>> + val = gpmc_cs_read_reg(gpmc_nand_data->cs, GPMC_CS_CONFIG7);
>> + val &= ~(0xf << 8);
>> + val |= (0xc & 0xf) << 8;
>> + gpmc_cs_write_reg(gpmc_nand_data->cs, GPMC_CS_CONFIG7, val);
>
> ..but this looks messy. Maybe use some GPMC defines for the
> 0xf << 8 mask?
>
> Then the 0xc & 0xf part looks a bit redundant, what's the 0xf
> there for?
>
> I know it's all from the old code, but might as well clean it up
> while at it :)
Ok, I'll drop next version of this patch for this.
--
Regards,
Vimal Singh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
