[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 3/7] nand: add nand mtd concat support

[Scott Wood <oss@buserror.net>]

On Thu, 2016-06-02 at 07:02 +0200, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Hello Scott,
> 
> Am 02.06.2016 um 02:09 schrieb Scott Wood:
> > On Tue, 2016-05-31 at 14:08 +0200, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> > > @@ -59,6 +64,9 @@ int nand_register(int devnum, struct mtd_info *mtd)
> > >   	 * via the mtdcore infrastructure (e.g. ubi).
> > >   	 */
> > >   	add_mtd_device(mtd);
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_MTD_CONCAT
> > > +	nand_devices_found++;
> > > +#endif
> > >   #endif
> > [snip]
> > > +		sprintf(c_mtd_name, "nand%d", nand_devices_found);
> > > +		mtd = mtd_concat_create(nand_info, nand_devices_found,
> > > +					c_mtd_name);
> > 
> > This assumes that there are no gaps in the NAND numbering (e.g. because
> > some
> > device was optional or failed to init).  It would be better to build an
> > array
> > by scanning nand_info[] for non-NULL devices.
> 
> Yes, you are right ... Hmm... thinking about it ... this did exactly
> my v1 ... I created such an array "mtd_nand_list" ... Ok, this
> "mtd_nand_list" was a variable in file scope ... but as it is an array
> of pointers, the mem footprint is not so big ...

My concern was code organization, not (just) footprint.

>  but if you find it
> better to scan nand_info and create a new array on stack, I can do
> this ... what way do you preffer?

On the stack.

-Scott