Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 4/4] ARM: at91: atmel_nand: add code to check the ONFI parameter ECC requirement

On 06/14/2013 06:20:42 AM, Josh Wu wrote:

+static int pmecc_choose_ecc(struct atmel_nand_host *host,

• struct nand_chip *chip,
  

• int *cap, int *sector_size)
  

+{

• /* Get ECC requirement from ONFI parameters */
• *cap = *sector_size = 0;
• if (chip->onfi_version) {

• if (!get_onfi_ecc_param(chip, cap, sector_size))
  

• 	MTDDEBUG(MTD_DEBUG_LEVEL1, "ONFI params,  
  

minimum required ECC: %d bits in %d bytes\n",

• 		*cap, *sector_size);
  

• else
  

• 	printk(KERN_WARNING "NAND chip ECC reqirement  
  

is in Extended ONFI parameter, we don't support yet.\n");

Both of these prints are dev_info in Linux. While I tend to agree that the first print should be debug and the second an error (or at least a warning), it doesn't make much sense to use KERN_WARNING in U-Boot-only code (and even in Linux, explicit use of KERN_WARNING is deprecated in favor of pr_warn or dev_warn).

• } else {

• printk(KERN_WARNING "NAND chip is not ONFI compliant,  
  

assume ecc_bits is 2 in 512 bytes");

• }
• if (*cap == 0 && *sector_size == 0) {

• /* Non-ONFI compliant or use extended ONFI parameters */
  

• *cap = 2;
  

• *sector_size = 512;
  

• }
• /* If head file doesn't specify then use the one in ONFI

parameters */

• if (host->pmecc_corr_cap == 0) {

• /* use the most fitable ecc bits (the near bigger one )  
  

*/

• if (*cap <= 2)
  

• 	host->pmecc_corr_cap = 2;
  

• else if (*cap <= 4)
  

• 	host->pmecc_corr_cap = 4;
  

• else if (*cap < 8)
  

• 	host->pmecc_corr_cap = 8;
  

• else if (*cap < 12)
  

• 	host->pmecc_corr_cap = 12;
  

• else if (*cap < 24)
  

• 	host->pmecc_corr_cap = 24;
  

• else
  

• 	return -EINVAL;
  

Why are some of these "<=" and others "<"?

-Scott