From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pa0-x22f.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22f]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1XoS28-0008BI-Nb for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 12 Nov 2014 07:08:05 +0000 Received: by mail-pa0-f47.google.com with SMTP id kx10so12239776pab.6 for ; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 23:07:43 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 23:07:37 -0800 From: Brian Norris To: Scott Wood Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1][v2] IFC: Change IO accessor based on endianness Message-ID: <20141112070737.GC29070@brian-ubuntu> References: <1413785506-443-1-git-send-email-b44839@freescale.com> <1415056966.23458.305.camel@snotra.buserror.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1415056966.23458.305.camel@snotra.buserror.net> Cc: B07421@freescale.com, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, arnd@arndb.de, Jaiprakash Singh List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 05:22:46PM -0600, Scott Wood wrote: > On Mon, 2014-10-20 at 11:41 +0530, Jaiprakash Singh wrote: > > From: Jaiprakash Singh > > > > IFC registers can be of type Little Endian > > or big Endian depending upon Freescale SoC. > > Here SoC defines the register type of > > IFC IP.So update accessors functions with > > common IFC accessors functions to take > > care both type of endianness. > > > > IFC IO accressor are set at run time based > > on IFC IP registers endianness.IFC node in > > DTS file contains information about > > endianness. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jaiprakash Singh > > --- > > Changes for v2 > > - Moved IFC accessor function to fsl_ifc.h > > from fsl_ifc.c and make them inline static > > > > .../bindings/memory-controllers/fsl/ifc.txt | 2 + > > drivers/memory/fsl_ifc.c | 72 ++++++---- > > drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_ifc_nand.c | 151 +++++++++++--------- > > include/linux/fsl_ifc.h | 42 ++++++ > > 4 files changed, 167 insertions(+), 100 deletions(-) > > Given that this spans MTD and non-MTD files, whose tree should this go > through? I already have one patch that touches these same files: http://git.infradead.org/l2-mtd.git/commitdiff/096916610f415e07cfe71d71a391011c617be5ed I don't actually see a MAINTAINERS entry for most of drivers/memory/, so I didn't think that was a problem. If the (fixed) full patch can be based on l2-mtd.git and submitted with linux-mtd@infradead.org in CC, I can consider taking it, pending proper review. Brian