On Thu, 2007-02-08 at 01:57 +0100, Thomas Koeller wrote:
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig b/drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig
> index 358f55a..5b50396 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig
> @@ -216,10 +216,26 @@ config MTD_NAND_DISKONCHIP_BBTWRITE
> Even if you leave this disabled, you can enable BBT writes at module
> load time (assuming you build diskonchip as a module) with the module
> parameter "inftl_bbt_write=1".
> -
> +
> config MTD_NAND_SHARPSL
> tristate "Support for NAND Flash on Sharp SL Series (C7xx + others)"
> depends on MTD_NAND && ARCH_PXA
> +
> +config MTD_NAND_BASLER_EXCITE
> + tristate "Support for NAND Flash on Basler eXcite"
> + depends on MTD_NAND && BASLER_EXCITE
> + help
> + This enables the driver for the NAND flash device found on the
> + Basler eXcite Smart Camera. If built as a module, the driver
> + will be named "excite_nandflash.ko".
> +
> +config MTD_NAND_BASLER_EXCITE
> + tristate "Support for NAND Flash on Basler eXcite"
> + depends on MTD_NAND && BASLER_EXCITE
> + help
> + This enables the driver for the NAND flash device found on the
> + Basler eXcite Smart Camera. If built as a module, the driver
> + will be named "excite_nandflash.ko".
You have the same config option twice... Cut and paste error?
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/excite_nandflash.c
> b/drivers/mtd/nand/excite_nandflash.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..d683659
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/excite_nandflash.c
<snip>
> +
> +#define io_readb(__a__) __raw_readb((__a__))
> +#define io_writeb(__v__, __a__) __raw_writeb((__v__), (__a__))
Do you really need these defines? Why can't you call
__raw_{readb,writeb} directly?
> +
> +typedef void __iomem *io_reg_t;
Ugh... typdef?
<snip>
> +static inline io_reg_t
> +excite_nand_map_regs(struct platform_device *d, const char *basename)
> +{
> + void *result = NULL;
> + const struct resource *const r =
> + excite_nand_get_resource(d, IORESOURCE_MEM, basename);
> + if (likely(r))
> + result = ioremap_nocache(r->start, r->end + 1 - r->start);
Does this likely really buy you anything? I would think doing the
converse (if any sort of *likely at all) would be better.
<snip>
> + */
> +static int __exit excite_nand_remove(struct device *dev)
> +{
> + struct excite_nand_drvdata * const this = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> +
> + dev_set_drvdata(dev, NULL);
> +
> + if (unlikely(!this)) {
> + printk(KERN_ERR "%s: called %s without private data!!",
> + module_id, __func__);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + /* first thing we need to do is release our mtd
> + * then go through freeing the resource used
> + */
> + nand_release(&this->board_mtd);
> +
> + /* free the common resources */
> + if (likely(this->regs)) {
> + iounmap(this->regs);
> + this->regs = NULL;
> + }
Same likely usage comment as above.
josh
