Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 23 Jan 2016 09:18:44 +0100 | From | Boris Brezillon <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] mtd: nand: sunxi: add randomizer support |
| |
Hi Brian,
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 18:57:13 -0800 Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com> wrote:
> All three look good, so pushed to l2-mtd.git/next. One comment below:
Thanks.
> > On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 12:01:07PM +0100, Boris Brezillon wrote: > > ... > > > +static u16 sunxi_nfc_randomizer_state(struct mtd_info *mtd, int page, bool ecc) > > +{ > > + const u16 *seeds = sunxi_nfc_randomizer_page_seeds; > > + int mod = mtd->erasesize / mtd->writesize; > > Richard suggested you use the mtd.h helper here. Patch below.
Yep, I forgot to do this change.
> > > + > > + if (mod > ARRAY_SIZE(sunxi_nfc_randomizer_page_seeds)) > > + mod = ARRAY_SIZE(sunxi_nfc_randomizer_page_seeds); > > + > > + if (ecc) { > > + if (mtd->ecc_step_size == 512) > > + seeds = sunxi_nfc_randomizer_ecc512_seeds; > > + else > > + seeds = sunxi_nfc_randomizer_ecc1024_seeds; > > + } > > + > > + return seeds[page % mod]; > > +} > > From: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com> > Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 18:54:02 -0800 > Subject: [PATCH] mtd: nand: sunxi: use mtd_div_by_ws() helper > > Suggested-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> > Signed-off-by: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>
> --- > drivers/mtd/nand/sunxi_nand.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/sunxi_nand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/sunxi_nand.c > index 5f700719d5c2..b5ea6b312df0 100644 > --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/sunxi_nand.c > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/sunxi_nand.c > @@ -624,7 +624,7 @@ static u16 sunxi_nfc_randomizer_step(u16 state, int count) > static u16 sunxi_nfc_randomizer_state(struct mtd_info *mtd, int page, bool ecc) > { > const u16 *seeds = sunxi_nfc_randomizer_page_seeds; > - int mod = mtd->erasesize / mtd->writesize; > + int mod = mtd_div_by_ws(mtd->erasesize, mtd);
Just a comment (which should not prevent you from applying this patch). Isn't it a bit overkill to cast the erasesize to a 64 bit value, and then do a do_div on it. Shouldn't happen often though, because ->writesize_shift should be != 0 in most (all?) cases.
Another related remark: with the MLC/paired pages stuff I'll have to retrieve this information (number of write units per erase block) quite often, so maybe we should have a field (and/or an helper) for that.
Thanks,
Boris
-- Boris Brezillon, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com
| |