Re: [PATCH 3/6] refactor mtd wait code

[Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com>]

On Tue, 2011-06-28 at 17:00 +0200, Matthieu CASTET wrote:
> Artem Bityutskiy a écrit :
> > On Tue, 2011-06-28 at 11:00 +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> >> On Sun, 2011-06-26 at 18:26 +0200, Matthieu CASTET wrote:
> >>> +/**
> >>> +  * This is call after sending a read command, or for autoincrement
> >>> +  * chip that need it (!NAND_NO_READRDY).
> >>> +  *
> >>> +  * We can't call NAND_CMD_STATUS here, because the read command
> >>> +  * is not finished
> >>> +  */
> >>> +static void nand_wait_read(struct mtd_info *mtd, struct nand_chip *chip)
> >>> +{
> >>> +	/*
> >>> +	 * If we don't have access to the busy pin, we apply the given
> >>> +	 * command delay
> >>> +	 */
> >>> +	if (!chip->dev_ready) {
> >>> +		udelay(chip->chip_delay);
> >>> +	}
> >>> +	else {
> >>> +		/* Apply this short delay always to ensure that we do wait tWB in
> >>> +		 * any case on any machine. */
> >>> +		ndelay(100);
> >> Please, all these hard-coded numbers should be hidden in the specific
> >> driver.
> > 
> > Or could you please explain a bit better why this delay has to be part
> > of nand core? And why it is 100 and not 200?
> > 
> This delay is already in the nand core. I only put it in a common function :

OK, sorry, but would it be possible to take a look at how this patch
could be split on smaller ones to make review a bit simpler?

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy