Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > So when use_default is true you use the last entry in the array. This > means you could skip reading the nand id when use_default is true. This > is a bit more efficient and makes the intention of the code more clear. Absolutely agreed, vor v3. >> + if (chip->options & NAND_BUSWIDTH_16) >> + ndcr |= NDCR_DWIDTH_M | NDCR_DWIDTH_C; >> + else >> + ndcr &= ~NDCR_DWIDTH_M & NDCR_DWIDTH_C; > > You want to clear both bits here, right? Then this is wrong and > should be ndcr &= ~NDCR_DWIDTH_M & ~NDCR_DWIDTH_C; > (or ndcr &= ~(NDCR_DWIDTH_M | NDCR_DWIDTH_C); which I'd consider more > readable) Good catch, I'll take your syntax also. As you probably have guessed, my testing is with a 16 bits wide NAND. > Otherwise I'm fine with this driver and we can merge it once the pxa3xx > base support is ready. Okay, great. I'm working on it. I'll post the v3 to not forget, and then let's wait until I have pxa3xx support sorted out. I'll repost anyway the driver once pxa3xx support is ironed out. In the meantime other reviewers could spot something I overlooked. Cheers. -- Robert _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
