public inbox for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
To: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@collabora.com>
Cc: Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@i2se.com>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
	Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>,
	Scott Branden <sbranden@broadcom.com>,
	Kamal Dasu <kdasu.kdev@gmail.com>, Ray Jui <rjui@broadcom.com>,
	Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>, Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net>,
	bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com,
	linux-rpi-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@microchip.com>,
	Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
	linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] mtd: rawnand: bcrmnand: Add exec_op() support
Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 18:57:39 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200511185739.51c94fd5@xps13> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200502163432.1543243-3-boris.brezillon@collabora.com>

Hi Boris,

Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@collabora.com> wrote on Sat,  2 May
2020 18:34:31 +0200:

> This implementation of exec_op() relies on low-level operations only. We
> could add support for high-level operations too through an op parser,
> but the gain is likely to be negligible since read/write page operations
> already have a fast path ({readwrite}_page[raw]() implementations).

Agreed.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@collabora.com>
> ---
>  drivers/mtd/nand/raw/brcmnand/brcmnand.c | 72 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 72 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/brcmnand/brcmnand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/brcmnand/brcmnand.c
> index e4e3ceeac38f..e70117146755 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/brcmnand/brcmnand.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/brcmnand/brcmnand.c
> @@ -1599,6 +1599,77 @@ static int brcmnand_low_level_op(struct brcmnand_host *host,
>  	return brcmnand_waitfunc(chip);
>  }
>  
> +static void brcmnand_exec_instr(struct brcmnand_host *host,
> +				const struct nand_op_instr *instr,
> +				bool last_op)
> +{
> +	unsigned int i;
> +	const u8 *out;
> +	u8 *in;
> +
> +	switch (instr->type) {
> +	case NAND_OP_CMD_INSTR:
> +		brcmnand_low_level_op(host, LL_OP_CMD,
> +				      instr->ctx.cmd.opcode, last_op);
> +		break;
> +
> +	case NAND_OP_ADDR_INSTR:
> +		for (i = 0; i < instr->ctx.addr.naddrs; i++)
> +			brcmnand_low_level_op(host, LL_OP_ADDR,
> +					      instr->ctx.addr.addrs[i],
> +					      last_op);
> +		break;
> +
> +	case NAND_OP_DATA_IN_INSTR:
> +		in = instr->ctx.data.buf.in;
> +		for (i = 0; i < instr->ctx.data.len; i++) {
> +			brcmnand_low_level_op(host, LL_OP_RD, 0, last_op);
> +			in[i] = brcmnand_read_reg(host->ctrl,
> +						  BRCMNAND_LL_RDATA);
> +		}
> +		break;
> +
> +	case NAND_OP_DATA_OUT_INSTR:
> +		out = instr->ctx.data.buf.out;
> +		for (i = 0; i < instr->ctx.data.len; i++)
> +			brcmnand_low_level_op(host, LL_OP_WR, out[i], last_op);
> +		break;
> +
> +	case NAND_OP_WAITRDY_INSTR:
> +		/*
> +		 * Nothing to do here, brcmnand_low_level_op() already waits on
> +		 * FLASH_READY every time it's called.
> +		 */
> +		break;
> +
> +	default:
> +		break;
> +	}
> +}
> +
> +static int brcmnand_exec_op(struct nand_chip *chip,
> +			    const struct nand_operation *op,
> +			    bool check_only)
> +{
> +	struct brcmnand_host *host = nand_get_controller_data(chip);
> +	struct mtd_info *mtd = nand_to_mtd(chip);
> +	unsigned int i;
> +
> +	if (check_only)
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	if (op->deassert_wp)
> +		brcmnand_wp(mtd, 0);
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < op->ninstrs; i++)
> +		brcmnand_exec_instr(host, &op->instrs[i], i == op->ninstrs - 1);

Maybe                                                          (              ) 

to improve readability?

Or even maybe using an intermediate boolean?

> +
> +	if (op->deassert_wp)
> +		brcmnand_wp(mtd, 1);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
>  static void brcmnand_cmdfunc(struct nand_chip *chip, unsigned command,
>  			     int column, int page_addr)
>  {
> @@ -2597,6 +2668,7 @@ static int brcmnand_attach_chip(struct nand_chip *chip)
>  
>  static const struct nand_controller_ops brcmnand_controller_ops = {
>  	.attach_chip = brcmnand_attach_chip,
> +	.exec_op = brcmnand_exec_op,
>  };
>  
>  static int brcmnand_init_cs(struct brcmnand_host *host, struct device_node *dn)

With this tiny change (don't resend if unneeded):

Reviewed-by: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>


Thanks,
Miquèl

______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/

  reply	other threads:[~2020-05-11 16:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-05-02 16:34 [PATCH 0/3] mtd: rawnand: brcmnand: Convert to exec_op() Boris Brezillon
2020-05-02 16:34 ` [PATCH 1/3] mtd: rawnand: Add the concept of destructive operation Boris Brezillon
2020-05-03  8:00   ` Boris Brezillon
2020-05-11 16:49     ` Miquel Raynal
2020-05-02 16:34 ` [PATCH 2/3] mtd: rawnand: bcrmnand: Add exec_op() support Boris Brezillon
2020-05-11 16:57   ` Miquel Raynal [this message]
2020-05-02 16:34 ` [PATCH 3/3] mtd: rawnand: brcmnand: Get rid of the legacy interface implementation Boris Brezillon

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=20200511185739.51c94fd5@xps13 \
    --to=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
    --cc=bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com \
    --cc=boris.brezillon@collabora.com \
    --cc=eric@anholt.net \
    --cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
    --cc=kdasu.kdev@gmail.com \
    --cc=lee@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-rpi-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=richard@nod.at \
    --cc=rjui@broadcom.com \
    --cc=sbranden@broadcom.com \
    --cc=stefan.wahren@i2se.com \
    --cc=tudor.ambarus@microchip.com \
    --cc=vigneshr@ti.com \
    /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