From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: lee.jones@linaro.org (Lee Jones)
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 17:32:01 +0000
Subject: [PATCH 02/10] mtd: st_spi_fsm: Supply all register address and
 bit logic defines
In-Reply-To: <20131118172243.GO2674@sirena.org.uk>
References: <20131118093229.GB13640@lee--X1>
 <20131118133940.GC14306@sirena.org.uk>
 <20131118142447.GJ13640@lee--X1>
 <20131118144512.GB24408@sirena.org.uk>
 <20131118145614.GM13640@lee--X1>
 <20131118151651.GE24408@sirena.org.uk>
 <20131118153110.GN13640@lee--X1>
 <20131118154137.GA28334@sirena.org.uk>
 <20131118160226.GO13640@lee--X1>
 <20131118172243.GO2674@sirena.org.uk>
Message-ID: <20131118173201.GP13640@lee--X1>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Mon, 18 Nov 2013, Mark Brown wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 04:02:26PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, 18 Nov 2013, Mark Brown wrote:
> 
> > > Like I say I'm suggesting that the bit of the code that understands the
> > > flash chip is separate to the bit of code that knows the mechanics of
> > > sending commands and data to the chip.
> 
> > The issue is that almost the entire driver is controller side. The
> > only bits that are the same (and not in all cases) are the OPCODEs,
> > but they are one liners (21 lines out of 1153). Most of the
> > controllers which use this stuff could reuse quite a bit of the m25p80
> > driver as they just write the message containing the OPCODE as the
> > m25p80 driver sets it up, but that's simply not the case with our
> > controller. We would have to pull the OPCODE out and based on which
> > one it is, we'd have to build our own message.
> 
> OK, so then perhaps the abstraction here is simply to export the table
> with the opcodes from the m25p80 driver so that when someone comes along
> and adds a new chip they can just add it there and other drivers will
> get the update too.

We could do that, although I'd have to insist on extending the current
framework to add a configuration call-back, as it's the neatest way to
configure chip specific attributes.

I can get a patch out tomorrow if the MTD guys agree. Where are they
by the way? I haven't seen hide nor hair of them since sending out the
patch set.

> > Put it this way, if we tried to use the m25p80 our controller driver
> > would most likely be twice as large and twice as complex as it is
> > currently, which is exactly the inverse of what we're trying to
> > achieve here.
> 
> If we're having to add new flashes to multiple drivers I'd not say we're
> winning.

I agree.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog