From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marek Vasut Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 18:25:52 +0100 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/4 V2] OneNAND: Add simple OneNAND SPL In-Reply-To: <4EB2CA2C.5070109@freescale.com> References: <1320067393-18822-4-git-send-email-marek.vasut@gmail.com> <201111031756.49790.marek.vasut@gmail.com> <4EB2CA2C.5070109@freescale.com> Message-ID: <201111031825.52659.marek.vasut@gmail.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de > On 11/03/2011 11:56 AM, Marek Vasut wrote: > >> On 11/02/2011 07:15 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > >>>> On 11/01/2011 05:54 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > >>>>> +static void spl_onenand_get_geometry(struct spl_onenand_data *data) > >>>>> +{ > >>> > >>> [...] > >>> > >>>>> + /* The page can be either 2k or 4k, avoid using DIV_ROUND_UP. */ > >>>>> + if (data.pagesize == 2048) { > >>>>> + total_pages = len / 2048; > >>>>> + page = offset / 2048; > >>>>> + total_pages += !!(len & 2047); > >>>>> + } else if (data.pagesize == 4096) { > >>>>> + total_pages = len / 4096; > >>>>> + page = offset / 4096; > >>>>> + total_pages += !!(len & 4095); > >>>>> + } > >>>> > >>>> What's wrong with DIV_ROUND_UP? It should produce smaller code than > >>>> what you've done here... > >>> > >>> It pulls in aeabi_*div* functions, which won't fit into block 0 of > >>> Onenand. > >> > >> It shouldn't do that if the divisor is a constant power of 2. The > >> compiler will turn it into a shift, just like with the other divides in > >> the above code fragment. > >> > >> You can't use DIV_ROUND_UP directly on data.pagesize, but you can use it > >> in each branch of the if statement instead of that awkward and slightly > >> more expensive !!(len & 4095) construct. > > > > Expensive in what way? > > Compare the resulting asm code. You're replacing this: > > a = (b + 4095) >> 12; > > with this: > > a = b >> 12; > if (b & 4095) > a++; > > > Either way, I don't think this matters that much. > > This is code that has to fit in 1K -- why waste instructions by writing > code in a way that is *less* readable? The size is the same (tested). I'll submit a patch with DIV_ROUND_UP, whatever. > > -Scott