From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.free-electrons.com ([62.4.15.54]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.87 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1cPllY-0000Qb-Fk for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Sat, 07 Jan 2017 07:50:19 +0000 Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2017 08:49:48 +0100 From: Boris Brezillon To: Marek Vasut Cc: Richard Weinberger , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, David Woodhouse , Brian Norris , Cyrille Pitchen , Icenowy Zheng , Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 07/15] mtd: nand: move Samsung specific init/detection logic in nand_samsung.c Message-ID: <20170107084948.1d5d699c@bbrezillon> In-Reply-To: <4982cf88-ff7e-20c9-a158-e1e3826c0762@gmail.com> References: <1483448495-31607-1-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> <1483448495-31607-8-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> <09da7377-1323-0794-fe61-34fd06e35404@gmail.com> <20170104180813.700823eb@bbrezillon> <4982cf88-ff7e-20c9-a158-e1e3826c0762@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Sat, 7 Jan 2017 00:53:24 +0100 Marek Vasut wrote: > On 01/04/2017 06:08 PM, Boris Brezillon wrote: > > On Wed, 4 Jan 2017 16:14:07 +0100 > > Marek Vasut wrote: > > > >> On 01/03/2017 02:01 PM, Boris Brezillon wrote: > >>> Move Samsung specific initialization and detection logic into > >>> nand_samsung.c. This is part of the "separate vendor specific code from > >>> core" cleanup process. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon > >> > >> [...] > >> > >>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_ids.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_ids.c > >>> index b3a332f37e14..05e9366696c9 100644 > >>> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_ids.c > >>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_ids.c > >>> @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ > >>> #include > >>> #include > >>> > >>> -#define LP_OPTIONS NAND_SAMSUNG_LP_OPTIONS > >>> +#define LP_OPTIONS 0 > >>> #define LP_OPTIONS16 (LP_OPTIONS | NAND_BUSWIDTH_16) > >>> > >>> #define SP_OPTIONS NAND_NEED_READRDY > >>> @@ -169,10 +169,12 @@ struct nand_flash_dev nand_flash_ids[] = { > >>> }; > >>> > >>> /* Manufacturer IDs */ > >>> +extern const struct nand_manufacturer_ops samsung_nand_manuf_ops; > >> > >> Is the extern needed ? > > > > Yes, unless you have another solution. If you remove the extern keyword > > you just redeclare samsung_nand_manuf_ops here, which is not what we > > want. > > Maybe some accessor function can help ? > You mean, in nand_ids.c const struct nand_manufacturer_ops *get_samsung_nand_mafuf_ops(); struct nand_manufacturers nand_manuf_ids[] = { ... {NAND_MFR_SAMSUNG, "Samsung", get_samsung_nand_mafuf_ops}, ... }; and then, in nand_samsung.c const struct nand_manufacturer_ops *get_samsung_nand_mafuf_ops() { return &samsung_nand_mafuf_ops; } What's the point of this extra indirection? I mean, in both cases you use a symbol that is not part of the same source file, so you'll have to define this symbol (using a function prototype or an extern object definition). Is this all about fixing checkpatch warnings, or do you have a problem with objects shared between different source files? Now, I agree that the current approach is not ideal. A real improvement would be to let the NAND manufacturer drivers (nand_.c) register themselves to the core. Something similar to CLK_OF_DECLARE() or IRQCHIP_DECLARE() for example. But that means creating a dedicated section for the nand_manufs_id table, and it's a lot more invasive than the current approach.