Hello,
Miquel Raynal <miquel.ray...@bootlin.com> wrote on Fri, 7 Dec 2018
11:06:24 +0100:
> Hi Stefan,
>
> Stefan Agner <ste...@agner.ch> wrote on Thu, 6 Dec 2018 14:57:09 +0100:
>
> > From: Stefan Agner <stefan.ag...@toradex.com>
> >
> > Each ECC layout consumes about 2984 bytes in the .data section. Allow
> > to disable the default ECC layouts if a driver is known to provide its
> > own ECC layout.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Stefan Agner <stefan.ag...@toradex.com>
> > ---
> >
> > drivers/mtd/nand/raw/Kconfig | 7 +++++++
> > drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c | 4 ++++
> > 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/Kconfig b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/Kconfig
> > index 008f7b4b4b..b06c45788a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/Kconfig
> > @@ -9,6 +9,12 @@ config SYS_NAND_SELF_INIT
> > This option, if enabled, provides more flexible and linux-like
> > NAND initialization process.
> >
> > +config SYS_NAND_DRIVER_ECC_LAYOUT
> > + bool
> > + help
> > + Omit standard ECC layouts to safe space. Select this if your driver
>
> s/safe/save/
>
> > + is known to provide its own ECC layout.
>
> layout*s*?
>
> > +
> > config NAND_ATMEL
> > bool "Support Atmel NAND controller"
> > imply SYS_NAND_USE_FLASH_BBT
> > @@ -81,6 +87,7 @@ config NAND_OMAP_ELM
> > config NAND_VF610_NFC
> > bool "Support for Freescale NFC for VF610"
> > select SYS_NAND_SELF_INIT
> > + select SYS_NAND_DRIVER_ECC_LAYOUT
> > imply CMD_NAND
> > help
> > Enables support for NAND Flash Controller on some Freescale
> > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c
> > b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c
> > index 92daebe120..6d2ff58d86 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c
> > @@ -47,6 +47,7 @@
> > #include <linux/errno.h>
> >
> > /* Define default oob placement schemes for large and small page devices */
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_SYS_NAND_DRIVER_ECC_LAYOUT
> > static struct nand_ecclayout nand_oob_8 = {
> > .eccbytes = 3,
> > .eccpos = {0, 1, 2},
> > @@ -89,6 +90,7 @@ static struct nand_ecclayout nand_oob_128 = {
> > {.offset = 2,
> > .length = 78} }
> > };
> > +#endif
> >
> > static int nand_get_device(struct mtd_info *mtd, int new_state);
> >
> > @@ -4339,6 +4341,7 @@ int nand_scan_tail(struct mtd_info *mtd)
> > */
> > if (!ecc->layout && (ecc->mode != NAND_ECC_SOFT_BCH)) {
> > switch (mtd->oobsize) {
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_SYS_NAND_DRIVER_ECC_LAYOUT
> > case 8:
> > ecc->layout = &nand_oob_8;
> > break;
> > @@ -4351,6 +4354,7 @@ int nand_scan_tail(struct mtd_info *mtd)
> > case 128:
> > ecc->layout = &nand_oob_128;
> > break;
> > +#endif
> > default:
> > pr_warn("No oob scheme defined for oobsize %d\n",
> > mtd->oobsize);
>
> I don't like very much the #ifdef approach to compile-out zones in the
> code. I don't have an alternative for now (maybe have the layouts in a
> different file?). I would also like to hear Boris' point of view.
I overlooked the headers, I thought you wanted that in Linux, that's
why I was asking Boris. For U-Boot I agree with the idea and we already
have a lot of #ifdef around there so unless someone else complains:
Reviewed-by: Miquel Raynal <miquel.ray...@bootlin.com>
Thanks,
Miquèl
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
