From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtprelay0131.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.131] helo=smtprelay.hostedemail.com) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1arAHl-000224-Bw for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 15 Apr 2016 20:24:13 +0000 Message-ID: <1460751818.19090.43.camel@perches.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/12] mtd: nand: fsmc: validate ECC setup by checking algorithm directly From: Joe Perches To: =?UTF-8?Q?Rafa=C5=82_Mi=C5=82ecki?= , Boris Brezillon Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, Richard Weinberger , David Woodhouse , Brian Norris , open list Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 13:23:38 -0700 In-Reply-To: <1460750052-16285-10-git-send-email-zajec5@gmail.com> References: <1460750052-16285-1-git-send-email-zajec5@gmail.com> <1460750052-16285-10-git-send-email-zajec5@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, 2016-04-15 at 21:54 +0200, Rafał Miłecki wrote: > NAND core sets ECC algorithm in algo field now and it should be > preferred over the mode field. This also prepares driver for dropping > NAND_ECC_SOFT_BCH. > > Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki > --- >  drivers/mtd/nand/fsmc_nand.c | 7 +++++-- >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/fsmc_nand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/fsmc_nand.c > index 1372040..0f8c63f 100644 > --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/fsmc_nand.c > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/fsmc_nand.c > @@ -958,9 +958,12 @@ static int __init fsmc_nand_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >   nand->ecc.strength = 1; >   break; >   > + case NAND_ECC_SOFT: >   case NAND_ECC_SOFT_BCH: > - dev_info(&pdev->dev, "Using 4-bit SW BCH ECC scheme\n"); > - break; > + if (nand->ecc.algo == NAND_ECC_BCH) { > + dev_info(&pdev->dev, "Using 4-bit SW BCH ECC scheme\n"); > + break; > + } >   >   default: >   dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Unsupported ECC mode!\n"); Why not just add NAND_ECC_SOFT above the default case?