From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: mnalajal@codeaurora.org (Murali Nalajala) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 15:29:44 +0530 Subject: [PATCH 2/2] mtd: msm_nand: Add initial msm nand driver support. In-Reply-To: <1302942029.2308.1.camel@koala> References: <1298940450-27365-1-git-send-email-mnalajal@codeaurora.org> <1298940450-27365-2-git-send-email-mnalajal@codeaurora.org> <1302861097.3220.12.camel@localhost> <4DA85B24.50807@codeaurora.org> <1302942029.2308.1.camel@koala> Message-ID: <4DA96890.2070207@codeaurora.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 4/16/2011 1:50 PM, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > On Fri, 2011-04-15 at 20:20 +0530, Murali Nalajala wrote: >> On 4/15/2011 3:21 PM, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: >>> On Tue, 2011-03-01 at 06:17 +0530, Murali Nalajala wrote: >>>> +#define pr_fmt(fmt) "%s:" fmt, __func__ >>>> + >>>> +#include >>>> +#include >>>> +#include >>>> +#include >>>> +#include >>>> +#include >>>> +#include >>>> +#include >>>> +#include >>>> +#include >>>> + >>>> +#include "msm_nand.h" >>>> + >>>> +unsigned long msm_nand_phys; >>> >>> No global variables like this please. Here is how you use them: >>> >>> +extern unsigned long msm_nand_phys; >> >> extern declaration in the 'C' file causing warning. We are in plan to >> upload the OneNAND changes soon which makes use of the same .h file. > > So you say that OneNAND (an independent driver) is going to use this > variable? Are you also going to export it? I haven't decided yet when oneNAND driver come in still it is under discussion. There is a chance that if OneNAND comes as an individual driver then i have to export this variable. Can i export this variable now? What is your suggestion? > >>> +#define MSM_NAND_REG(off) (msm_nand_phys + (off)) >>> + >>> +#define MSM_NAND_FLASH_CMD MSM_NAND_REG(0x0000) >>> +#define MSM_NAND_ADDR0 MSM_NAND_REG(0x0004) >>> >>> Could you please make the macros to take the "struct msm_nand_chip >>> *chip" argument instead, and store the pase address there. Do not hide >>> the fact that those macros are actually functions, not constant - this >>> is error prone. >>> >>> Besides, I'm do not know your HW, but if you have several controllers >>> with various base addresses - your driver won't work. >> >> you are correct, we have multiple controllers, which breaks this logic >> in future. > > So then make your macros to accept the base address as an argument > instead please. > Thanks, Murali N -- Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.