Re: [RESEND PATCH v3 19/20] mtd: spi-nor: Introduce spi_nor_get_flash_info()

Vignesh Raghavendra
2019-08-27T07:37:18Z

On 26/08/19 5:39 PM, Tudor.Ambarus@microchip.com wrote:
> From: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@microchip.com>
>
> Dedicate a function for getting the pointer to the flash_info
> const struct. Trim a bit the spi_nor_scan() huge function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@microchip.com>
> Reviewed-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@collabora.com>
> ---

Reviewed-by: Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>

Regards
Vignesh

> v3: no changes
>
> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c | 76 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
> 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c
> index d13317d1f372..ec70b58294ec 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c
> @@ -4766,10 +4766,50 @@ static int spi_nor_set_addr_width(struct spi_nor *nor)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static const struct flash_info *spi_nor_get_flash_info(struct spi_nor *nor,
> + const char *name)
> +{
> + const struct flash_info *info = NULL;
> +
> + if (name)
> + info = spi_nor_match_id(name);
> + /* Try to auto-detect if chip name wasn't specified or not found */
> + if (!info)
> + info = spi_nor_read_id(nor);
> + if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(info))
> + return ERR_PTR(-ENOENT);
> +
> + /*
> + * If caller has specified name of flash model that can normally be
> + * detected using JEDEC, let's verify it.
> + */
> + if (name && info->id_len) {
> + const struct flash_info *jinfo;
> +
> + jinfo = spi_nor_read_id(nor);
> + if (IS_ERR(jinfo)) {
> + return jinfo;
> + } else if (jinfo != info) {
> + /*
> + * JEDEC knows better, so overwrite platform ID. We
> + * can't trust partitions any longer, but we'll let
> + * mtd apply them anyway, since some partitions may be
> + * marked read-only, and we don't want to lose that
> + * information, even if it's not 100% accurate.
> + */
> + dev_warn(nor->dev, "found %s, expected %s\n",
> + jinfo->name, info->name);
> + info = jinfo;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + return info;
> +}
> +
> int spi_nor_scan(struct spi_nor *nor, const char *name,
> const struct spi_nor_hwcaps *hwcaps)
> {
> - const struct flash_info *info = NULL;
> + const struct flash_info *info;
> struct device *dev = nor->dev;
> struct mtd_info *mtd = &nor->mtd;
> struct device_node *np = spi_nor_get_flash_node(nor);
> @@ -4800,37 +4840,9 @@ int spi_nor_scan(struct spi_nor *nor, const char *name,
> if (!nor->bouncebuf)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> - if (name)
> - info = spi_nor_match_id(name);
> - /* Try to auto-detect if chip name wasn't specified or not found */
> - if (!info)
> - info = spi_nor_read_id(nor);
> - if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(info))
> - return -ENOENT;
> -
> - /*
> - * If caller has specified name of flash model that can normally be
> - * detected using JEDEC, let's verify it.
> - */
> - if (name && info->id_len) {
> - const struct flash_info *jinfo;
> -
> - jinfo = spi_nor_read_id(nor);
> - if (IS_ERR(jinfo)) {
> - return PTR_ERR(jinfo);
> - } else if (jinfo != info) {
> - /*
> - * JEDEC knows better, so overwrite platform ID. We
> - * can't trust partitions any longer, but we'll let
> - * mtd apply them anyway, since some partitions may be
> - * marked read-only, and we don't want to lose that
> - * information, even if it's not 100% accurate.
> - */
> - dev_warn(dev, "found %s, expected %s\n",
> - jinfo->name, info->name);
> - info = jinfo;
> - }
> - }
> + info = spi_nor_get_flash_info(nor, name);
> + if (IS_ERR(info))
> + return PTR_ERR(info);
>
> nor->info = info;
>
>

--
Regards
Vignesh