On Fri, 2014-07-25 at 07:26 +0300, Siarhei Siamashka wrote: > > > + number_of_lanes = mctl_get_number_of_lanes(); > > > > There is a subtle functional change here since number_of_lanes can be 1 > > whereas n could never have been 2. Is that intended/ok? Please mention > > in the commit message. > > I tried to experiment with setting the 8-bit bus width and it is > semi-workable (single byte access is OK, but accessing more than > one byte is broken). This part of the patch looks like a forgotten > leftover of these experiments. But it clearly has no practical > value and we only normally deal with the 16-bit or 32-bit bus width. > > The most correct way of handling this unexpected code branch would > be to panic. But that's an unnecessarily increase of the code size. > So I think that the best solution is just to keep the old code > logic (expect only 16-bit or 32-bit bus width and 2 or 4 lanes).
Not sure how much a panic actually adds to the code size or if it is worth worrying about, but removing the 8-bit stuff is fine by me anyway. Ian. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "linux-sunxi" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
