Re: [PATCH] mtd: gpmi: add NAND write verify support

[Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>]

Dear Fabio Estevam,

> Hi Marek,
> 
> On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote:
> >> Even there are two nand chips, there is only one gpmi controller.
> > 
> > For now ... yes.
> 
> Does this look better?
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/gpmi-nand/gpmi-nand.c
> b/drivers/mtd/nand/gpmi-nand index 8c0d2f0..5262ef3 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/gpmi-nand/gpmi-nand.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/gpmi-nand/gpmi-nand.c
> @@ -1533,6 +1533,21 @@ void gpmi_nfc_exit(struct gpmi_nand_data *this)
>         gpmi_free_dma_buffer(this);
>  }
> 
> +static int gpmi_verify_buf(struct mtd_info *mtd, const uint8_t *buf, int
> len) +{
> +       struct nand_chip *nand = mtd->priv;
> +       struct gpmi_nand_data *data = container_of(mtd, struct
> gpmi_nand_data, +                                                         
>         mtd); +       int ret;
> +
> +       ret = gpmi_ecc_read_page(mtd, nand, data->verify_buf, 0, 0);

You ignored my comment on this one.

> +       if (ret)
> +               return -EFAULT;
> +       if (memcmp(buf, data->verify_buf, len))
> +               return -EFAULT;
> +       return 0;
> +}
> +
>  static int __devinit gpmi_nfc_init(struct gpmi_nand_data *this)
>  {
>         struct mtd_info  *mtd = &this->mtd;
> @@ -1555,6 +1570,7 @@ static int __devinit gpmi_nfc_init(struct
> gpmi_nand_data * chip->dev_ready         = gpmi_dev_ready;
>         chip->read_byte         = gpmi_read_byte;
>         chip->read_buf          = gpmi_read_buf;
> +       chip->verify_buf        = gpmi_verify_buf;
>         chip->write_buf         = gpmi_write_buf;
>         chip->ecc.read_page     = gpmi_ecc_read_page;
>         chip->ecc.write_page    = gpmi_ecc_write_page;
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/gpmi-nand/gpmi-nand.h
> b/drivers/mtd/nand/gpmi-nand index 1547a60..cd9bdf7 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/gpmi-nand/gpmi-nand.h
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/gpmi-nand/gpmi-nand.h
> @@ -148,6 +148,7 @@ struct gpmi_nand_data {
>         /* General-use Variables */
>         int                     current_chip;
>         unsigned int            command_length;
> +       uint8_t                 verify_buf[NAND_MAX_PAGESIZE];

Yes, this is definitelly better.

>         /* passed from upper layer */
>         uint8_t                 *upper_buf;
> 
> and then I can also send this separate change to allow multi-instances:
> 
> @@ -1630,7 +1646,7 @@ static int __devinit gpmi_nand_probe(struct
> platform_devic return -ENOMEM;
>         }
> 
> -       this = kzalloc(sizeof(*this), GFP_KERNEL);
> +       this = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*this), GFP_KERNEL);

devm_clk_* functions could be used too from a quick glance ... devm_request_irq 
is in place iirc, but check that too.

>         if (!this) {
>                 pr_err("Failed to allocate per-device memory\n");
>                 return -ENOMEM;

Best regards,
Marek Vasut