Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 16 Jun 2011 15:48:46 +0200 | From | Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] ATMEL, AVR32: inline nand partition table access |
| |
On 10:05 Mon 06 Jun , Nicolas Ferre wrote: > Le 01/06/2011 16:54, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov : > > 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. > > > > 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. > > > I am in favor for a mainline inclusion through linux-mtd tree. > > On the AT91 side, we will have to take this inclusion into account to > avoid merge conflicts... But as long as this cleanup is not ready yet, I > prefer to go forward this way. > > For that purpose, that would be good to see this patch in linux-next. agreed
Acked-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>
Best Regards, J.
| |