Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 21 Oct 2019 09:44:35 +0200 | From | Boris Brezillon <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH RFC 2/3] mtd: rawnand: Add support Macronix Block Protection function |
| |
On Mon, 21 Oct 2019 15:23:57 +0800 masonccyang@mxic.com.tw wrote:
> Hi Miquel, > > > > > > > Then fill-in these two hooks from the manufacturer code, without > the > > > > > postponed init. > > > > > > > > > > > > > But in the final of nand_scan_tail(), mtd->_lock/_unlock will be > > > > filled by NULL, right ? > > > > > > The NAND core should set mtd->_lock/_unlock() to NAND specific hooks > so > > > that the MTD layer is abstracted and and drivers do not see it. Then, > > > in the NAND helper, either there is no specific hook defined by a > > > manufacturer driver and you return -ENOTSUPP, or you execute the > > > defined hook. > > > > okay, patch specific manufacturer _lock/_unlock driver > > in nand_manufacturer_init(); > > > > and in the final of nand_scan_tail() > > if (!mtd->_lock) > > mtd->_lock = NULL; > > if (!mtd->_unlock) > > mtd->_unlock = NULL; > > > I'm still considering of post_init() in nand_scan_tail() for > MTD layer default call-back function replacement because > there would be more call-back functions need it. > i.e., > MTD->_lock/_unlokc > MTD->_suspend/_resume
Again, that's something that needs to be abstracted so that both the NAND manufacturer driver and the NAND controller driver can take appropriate actions on suspend/resume operations.
> NTD->_point/_unpoint
->_point/_unpoint() are irrelevant for a NAND chip.
> ... > > > actually, my patch series are including MTD->_locl/_unlock and > MTD->_suspend/_resume. how do you think ?
Miquel was suggesting to add nand_chip->{lock,unlock,is_locked}() methods that would be implemented by the NAND manufacturer drivers, and have generic wrappers implemented in nand_base.c:
static int nand_lock(struct mtd_info *mtd, loff_t ofs, uint64_t len) { struct nand_chip *chip = mtd_to_nand(mtd);
if (!chip->lock) return -ENOTSUPP;
return chip->lock(chip, ofs, len); }
...
If you do that, you won't need this post_init() hook.
| |