From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/9] mtd: nand: add sunxi NAND flash controller support
Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 11:49:42 -0700
Message-ID: <20140520184942.GT28907@ld-irv-0074>
References: <1394647664-8258-1-git-send-email-b.brezillon.dev@gmail.com>
 <1394647664-8258-6-git-send-email-b.brezillon.dev@gmail.com>
 <20140509160341.GA6984@arch.cereza>
 <536D069A.40401@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <linux-doc-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <536D069A.40401@gmail.com>
Sender: linux-doc-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Boris BREZILLON <b.brezillon.dev@gmail.com>
Cc: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com>, Emilio =?iso-8859-1?Q?L=F3pez?= <emilio@elopez.com.ar>, Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>, Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com>, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>, Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, dev@linux-sunxi.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 06:47:22PM +0200, Boris BREZILLON wrote:
> On 09/05/2014 18:03, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
> > On 12 Mar 07:07 PM, Boris BREZILLON wrote:
> >> --- /dev/null
> >> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/sunxi_nand.c
> >> @@ -0,0 +1,1276 @@
...
> >> +static int sunxi_nand_ecc_init(struct mtd_info *mtd, struct nand_ecc_ctrl *ecc,
> >> +			       struct device_node *np)
> >> +{
> >> +	struct nand_chip *nand = mtd->priv;
> >> +	int ecc_step_size, ecc_strength;
> >> +	int ret;
> >> +
> >> +	ecc_step_size = of_get_nand_ecc_step_size(np);
> >> +	ecc_strength = of_get_nand_ecc_strength(np);
> >> +	if (ecc_step_size > 0 && ecc_strength > 0) {
> >> +		ecc->size = ecc_step_size;
> >> +		ecc->strength = ecc_strength;
> >> +	} else {
> >> +		ecc->size = nand->ecc_step_ds;
> >> +		ecc->strength = nand->ecc_strength_ds;
> >> +	}
> >> +
> > Shouldn't you check the devicetree value is not weaker than the ONFI-obtained?
> 
> I can definitely do that.

You can do that here, but take a look at the discussion Ezequiel and I
had about this:

  http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.devicetree/67462

We probably don't want to be doing anything drastic like overriding the
device tree configuration. Instead, we might want to stick a warning
into the core nand_base code that does the proper comparison of the
'*_ds' values with the actual values chosen in
chip->ecc->{size,strength}. The comparison is kind of subtle, actually,
so it'd be good to do it exactly once for everyone.

Brian