From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: kgene.kim@samsung.com (Kukjin Kim) Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 15:47:40 +0900 Subject: [PATCH] S5PV310: Define the OneNAND platform and interrupt definition In-Reply-To: <20100728011724.GA1886@july> References: <20100728011724.GA1886@july> Message-ID: <000001cb2e20$c998da20$5cca8e60$%kim@samsung.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Kyungmin Park wrote: > > From: Kyungmin Park > > s5pc210(aka S5PV310) has same OneNAND controller as s5pc110. > > It's against the Kukjin's latest s5pv310 tree. > > Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park > --- Hmm...as I said to MyungJoo just now, it would be helpful if you could make patchset not each patch. Because your 3 OneNAND patches are for support S5PC210 OneNAND...and there are some dependencies each other. > arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/include/mach/irqs.h | 2 ++ > arch/arm/plat-s5p/dev-onenand.c | 19 ++++++++++++++++++- > 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/include/mach/irqs.h b/arch/arm/mach- > s5pv310/include/mach/irqs.h > index 56885ca..f7fb2b8 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/include/mach/irqs.h > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/include/mach/irqs.h > @@ -66,6 +66,8 @@ > > #define IRQ_IIC COMBINER_IRQ(27, 0) > > +#define IRQ_ONENAND_AUDI COMBINER_IRQ(34, 0) > + > /* Set the default NR_IRQS */ > #define NR_IRQS > COMBINER_IRQ(MAX_COMBINER_NR, 0) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-s5p/dev-onenand.c b/arch/arm/plat-s5p/dev-onenand.c > index 00facbe..8d191c5 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/plat-s5p/dev-onenand.c > +++ b/arch/arm/plat-s5p/dev-onenand.c > @@ -29,11 +29,17 @@ static struct resource s5pc110_onenand_resources[] = { > }, > [1] = { > .start = S5PC110_PA_ONENAND_DMA, > - .end = S5PC110_PA_ONENAND_DMA + SZ_2K - 1, > + .end = S5PC110_PA_ONENAND_DMA + SZ_8K - 1, > .flags = IORESOURCE_MEM, > }, > + [2] = { > + .start = IRQ_ONENAND_AUDI, > + .end = IRQ_ONENAND_AUDI, Hmm...according to your first patch, always compile this file in plat-s5p... But other S5P SoCs don't have IRQ_ONENAND_AUDI definition...:-( Please make sure your patch doesn't any problem before submitting. > + .flags = IORESOURCE_IRQ, > + }, > }; > > +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_S5PV210 > struct platform_device s5pc110_device_onenand = { > .name = "s5pc110-onenand", > .id = -1, > @@ -50,3 +56,14 @@ void s5pc110_onenand_set_platdata(struct > onenand_platform_data *pdata) > printk(KERN_ERR "%s: no memory for platform data\n", > __func__); > s5pc110_device_onenand.dev.platform_data = pd; > } > +#endif > + > +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_S5PV310 > +/* Note that S5PC210(aka S5PV310) has same OneNAND controller as s5pc110 */ So...why did you separate s5pc110_device_onenand and s5pc210_device_onenand... I think just s5p_device_onenand is enough.. > +struct platform_device s5pc210_device_onenand = { > + .name = "s5pc110-onenand", > + .id = -1, > + .num_resources = ARRAY_SIZE(s5pc110_onenand_resources), > + .resource = s5pc110_onenand_resources, > +}; > +#endif > -- Hmm...I wonder that should be separated S5PC110(S5PV210) and S5PC210(S5PV310) Thanks. Best regards, Kgene. -- Kukjin Kim , Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.