Robert, On 24 August 2015 at 15:24, Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarz...@free.fr> wrote: > Ezequiel Garcia <ezequ...@vanguardiasur.com.ar> writes: > >> Should we worry about having two definitions for the same bit? >> Would it be too ugly to mix the two meaning? Something like this: >> >> /* This bit has two different meanings on NFCv1 and NFCv2 */ >> #define NDCR_STOP_ON_UNCOR_ARB_CNTL (0x1 << 19) > I don't find that very pretty, but if you want I can put that in the patch > instead. >
Yeah, it's far from pretty. OK, another idea. How about this: #define NFCV2_NDCR_STOP_ON_UNCOR (0x1 << 19) #define NFCV1_NDCR_ARB_CNTL (0x1 << 19) Or maybe I'm just bike-shedding here? I figured it's important to document the bit has different meanings in different hardware versions. Anyway, just submit a v2 with whatever you feel it's less ugly. >>> @@ -1784,6 +1787,8 @@ static int pxa3xx_nand_remove(struct platform_device >>> *pdev) >>> free_irq(irq, info); >>> pxa3xx_nand_free_buff(info); >>> >> >> I think a comment here explaining how this disables DFI arbitration and >> how clearing it grants DFI access to SMC only. >> >> While here, we might want to document how the whole arbiter applies to >> PXA only, since the DFI bus is shared there. > Ok, for v2. I take it that DFI bus is not shared on Armada, lucky you. Right, seems not shared. > Maybe > something like : > > /* > * In the pxa3xx case, the DFI bus is shared between the SMC and NFC. In order > * to prevent a lockup of the system bus, the DFI bus arbitration is granted > * to SMC upon driver removal. This is done by setting the x_ARB_CNTL bit, > * which also prevents the NAND to have access to the bus anymore. > */ > That'll work. Feel free to send a v2. -- Ezequiel GarcĂa, VanguardiaSur www.vanguardiasur.com.ar -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/