H Scott, If you you don't mind, I'm okay to this patch. Can you merge it?
Thank you, Kyungmin Park On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Amul Kumar Saha <amul.s...@samsung.com> wrote: > Hi Scott, > >>> +static loff_t flexonenand_addr(struct onenand_chip *this, int block) >>> +{ >>> + loff_t ofs = 0; >>> + int die = 0, boundary; >>> + >>> + if (ONENAND_IS_DDP(this) && block >= this->density_mask) { >>> + block -= this->density_mask; >>> + die = 1; >>> + ofs = this->diesize[0]; >>> + } >>> + >>> + boundary = this->boundary[die]; >>> + ofs += block << (this->erase_shift - 1); >>> + if (block > (boundary + 1)) >>> + ofs += (block - boundary - 1) << (this->erase_shift - 1); >>> + return ofs; >> >> You're missing some (loff_t) casts that are in Linux, here and elsewhere. >> > > Accepted and corrected > >>> +inline loff_t onenand_addr(struct onenand_chip *this, int block) >> >> This is not a header file; let GCC decide when to inline. Note that this >> function is not specified as inline in Linux. >> > > Accepted and corrected > >> There are some other fairly significant differences with Linux later in >> the patch -- is this due to missing functionality that u-boot doesn't >> need, or something else? >> > > Yes, there are certain functionalities that OneNAND doesn't need in U-Boot. > Sending the updated patches. > > Regards, > Amul Kumar Saha > > > _______________________________________________ > U-Boot mailing list > U-Boot@lists.denx.de > http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot > _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot