[U-Boot] [PATCH 17/30] cramfs: make cramfs usable without a NOR flash

Heiko Schocher
2011-05-03T05:49:20Z

Hello Wolfgang,

Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Valentin Longchamp,
>
> In message <e0cad960c27371170bf2d2d4be3362d6665fbbfa.1302272395.git.valentin.longchamp@keymile.com> you wrote:
>> From: Heiko Schocher <hs@denx.de>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Heiko Schocher <hs@denx.de>
>> cc: Wolfgang Denk <wd@denx.de>
>> cc: Detlev Zundel <dzu@denx.de>
>> cc: Valentin Longchamp <valentin.longchamp@keymile.com>
>> cc: Holger Brunck <holger.brunck@keymile.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Valentin Longchamp <valentin.longchamp@keymile.com>
>> ---
>> common/cmd_cramfs.c | 12 +++++++++++-
>> fs/cramfs/cramfs.c | 4 ++++
>> 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/common/cmd_cramfs.c b/common/cmd_cramfs.c
>> index 8c86dc5..5e1487f 100644
>> --- a/common/cmd_cramfs.c
>> +++ b/common/cmd_cramfs.c
>> @@ -43,7 +43,9 @@
>> #endif
>>
>> #ifdef CONFIG_CRAMFS_CMDLINE
>> -flash_info_t flash_info[1];
>> +#if !defined(CONFIG_SYS_NO_FLASH)
>> +#include <flash.h>
>> +#endif
>
> Do we need the #ifndef here? I don;t thik it hurts if we
> unconditionally #include <flash.h> ?

Yep, you are right.

> But note: there was no "extern" in this declaration of flash_info[],
> i. e. we _did_ allocate storage here. Is the new code really
> equivalent? How extensively has it been tested?

flash_info is defined in the flash driver, so this is OK.
It is tested on the keymile boards, and a MAKEALL runs
clean.

>> #ifndef CONFIG_CMD_JFFS2
>> #include <linux/stat.h>
>> @@ -119,7 +121,11 @@ int do_cramfs_load(cmd_tbl_t *cmdtp, int flag, int argc, char * const argv[])
>> dev.id = &id;
>> part.dev = &dev;
>> /* fake the address offset */
>> +#if !defined(CONFIG_SYS_NO_FLASH)
>> part.offset = addr - flash_info[id.num].start[0];
>> +#else
>> + part.offset = addr;
>> +#endif
>
> Sequences like this repeat a number of times. How about
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_SYS_NO_FLASH
> # define OFFSET_ADJUSTMENT(x) 0
> #else
> # define OFFSET_ADJUSTMENT(x) (flash_info[id.num].start[x])
> #endif
> ...
> dev.id = &id;
> part.dev = &dev;
> /* fake the address offset */
> part.offset = addr - OFFSET_ADJUSTMENT(0);

Yep, that looks better, I change this.

>> +#if !defined(CONFIG_SYS_NO_FLASH)
>> part.offset = addr - flash_info[id.num].start[0];
>> +#else
>> + part.offset = addr;
>> +#endif
>
> part.offset = addr - OFFSET_ADJUSTMENT(0);
>
>> extern flash_info_t flash_info[];
>> #define PART_OFFSET(x) (x->offset + flash_info[x->dev->id->num].start[0])
>> +#else
>> +#define PART_OFFSET(x) (x->offset)
>
> #define PART_OFFSET(x) (x->offset + OFFSET_ADJUSTMENT(0))
>
>
> [If we always refer to start[0] only, we can even omit the argument.]

Yep.

Wolfgang? Is it OK, to send a v2 which is not in this patchseries,
as I think this is an independent patch?

bye,
Heiko
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany