Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] ATMEL, AVR32: inline nand partition table access | From | Hans-Christian Egtvedt <> | Date | Mon, 06 Jun 2011 07:49:31 +0200 |
| |
On Wed, 2011-06-01 at 18:54 +0400, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote: > On 6/1/11, Hans-Christian Egtvedt <hans-christian.egtvedt@atmel.com> wrote: > > On Sun, 2011-05-29 at 17:49 +0400, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote: > >> Currently atmel_nand driver used by AT91 and AVR32 calls a special > >> callback > >> which return nand partition table and number of partitions. However in all > >> boards this callback returns just static data. So drop this callback and > >> make atmel_nand use partition table provided statically via platform_data. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbaryshkov@gmail.com> > > > > Thanks for this update, always nice seeing code being optimized. I > > really can't recall why it was made like this in the first place... > > > > For the AVR32 related parts: > > > > Acked-by: Hans-Christian Egtvedt <hans-christian.egtvedt@atmel.com> > > > > <snipp diff> > > > > Will this go through the linux-mtd tree (since it spans two archs) or > > should it go through an arch tree? > > On one hand, I'd prefer for this to go through the linux-mtd, if noone objects, > as I'd also like to submit several (a pile) patches cleaning up mtd > partitioning, which would depend on this.
I'm fine by sending the changes for AVR32 through linux-mtd, they are minor and so far doesn't touch anything else that is changed.
> OTOH, I think there will be a cleanup of AT91 platform, which would bring > lot's of conflicts with this patch, if it goes through linux-mtd.
AT91 will probably be worse, yes, should be doable by git to solve the conflicts on its own. I'll leave it to Nicolas to give his verdict.
-- Hans-Christian Egtvedt
| |