Hello Tim,
dropped [email protected] and added [email protected]
Please ust the new list for further patches, thanks!
On 14.09.26 05:32, Tim Kuo wrote:
From: Tim Kuo <[email protected]>
spi_nand_idx numbers the "spi-nandN" MTD names and was incremented inside
the sprintf() before chip had been initialized and registered.
If spinand_init() or add_mtd_device() subsequently fails, the index is
consumed anyway and the numbering gets a hole: on a board where the first
SPI NAND fails to probe, the second one comes up as "spi-nand1" and no
"spi-nand0" exists at all.
This patch will pass the current value to sprintf() and increment only
after add_mtd_device() has succeeded, so spi_nand_idx counts the SPI
NAND devices actually registered and the names stay contiguous starting
at spi-nand0.
Signed-off-by: Tim Kuo <[email protected]>
---
drivers/mtd/nand/spi/core.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/spi/core.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/spi/core.c
index 14af4264612..1fa669f3def 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/spi/core.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/spi/core.c
@@ -1691,7 +1691,7 @@ static int spinand_probe(struct udevice *dev)
mtd->name = malloc(20);
if (!mtd->name)
return -ENOMEM;
- sprintf(mtd->name, "spi-nand%d", spi_nand_idx++);
+ sprintf(mtd->name, "spi-nand%d", spi_nand_idx);
spinand->slave = slave;
spinand_set_ofnode(spinand, dev_ofnode(dev));
#endif
@@ -1709,6 +1709,7 @@ static int spinand_probe(struct udevice *dev)
goto err_spinand_cleanup;
plat->mtd = mtd;
+ spi_nand_idx++;
return 0;
Reviewed-by: Heiko Schocher <[email protected]>
bye,
Heiko
--
Nabla Software Engineering
HRB 40522 Augsburg
Phone: +49 821 45592596
E-Mail: [email protected]
Geschäftsführer : Stefano Babic
