From: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
To: Ivan Djelic <ivan.djelic@parrot.com>
Cc: afzal@ti.com,
"linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] ARM: OMAP3: gpmc: add BCH ecc api and modes
Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 08:31:42 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120509153141.GI5088@atomide.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120509081047.GC17333@parrot.com>
* Ivan Djelic <ivan.djelic@parrot.com> [120509 01:15]:
> On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 01:29:28AM +0100, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > * Ivan Djelic <ivan.djelic@parrot.com> [120426 05:23]:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > Here is version 3 of this patch after review from Tony Lindgren.
> > > This version adds a separate initialization function mostly to check CPU
> > > compatibility. This check cannot be done in gpmc_enable_hwecc_bch() (which
> > > is meant to be called from mtd function ecc.hwctl) because ecc.hwctl is
> > > not called before the first NAND read access, and it cannot return an error
> > > status.
> >
> > Thanks applying into devel-gpmc branch.
>
> OK thanks!
>
> I still have a question though: there are recent patches from
> Afzal Mohammed that seem to go into the opposite direction, that is
> giving back GPMC register access to the omap2 NAND driver.
> In particular, [PATCH v4 17/39] [1] commit message says:
>
> GPMC driver has been modified to fill NAND platform data with GPMC
> NAND register details. As these registers are accessible in NAND
> driver itself, configure NAND in GPMC by itself.
>
> This also includes ecc configuration. My original mtd driver patch indeed had
> ecc handling code inside the driver (not in arch/arm/mach-omap2/gpmc.c).
>
> So, my question is: which direction are we going to with respect to this
> OMAP GPMC/NAND code separation ?
What Afzal is doing is where we're heading. However, I'm afraid that
may not be quite ready for v3.5 merge window as it needs proper testing
on quite a few platforms to avoid issues with various devices connected
to GPMC.
> Note that I could prepare a new MTD patch with BCH ecc code included,
> allowing to drop the GPMC BCH ecc api.
OK, let's do that then. I'll drop this patch and you can coordinate
your patch with Afzal.
Regards,
Tony
> [1] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2012-May/041105.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-09 15:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-26 12:17 [PATCH v3] ARM: OMAP3: gpmc: add BCH ecc api and modes Ivan Djelic
2012-05-09 0:29 ` Tony Lindgren
2012-05-09 8:07 ` Ivan Djelic
2012-05-09 8:10 ` Ivan Djelic
2012-05-09 15:31 ` Tony Lindgren [this message]
2012-05-10 6:49 ` Mohammed, Afzal
2012-05-10 13:07 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-05-10 15:17 ` Ivan Djelic
2012-05-10 15:52 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-05-10 17:45 ` Ivan Djelic
2012-05-10 19:02 ` Tony Lindgren
2012-05-11 15:38 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-05-11 15:50 ` Mohammed, Afzal
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120509153141.GI5088@atomide.com \
--to=tony@atomide.com \
--cc=afzal@ti.com \
--cc=ivan.djelic@parrot.com \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox