AcoSail/kernel_optimize_test
8
0
Fork 0
forked from luck/tmp_suning_uos_patched
Code Pull Requests Activity

mtd: nand: rearrange ONFI revision checking, add ONFI 2.3

Browse Source 
In checking for the ONFI revision, the first conditional (for checking
"unsupported" ONFI) seems unnecessary.  All ONFI revisions should be
backwards-compatible; even if this is not the case on some newer ONFI
revision, it should simply fail the second version-checking if-else block
(i.e., the bit-fields for 1.0, 2.0, etc. would not be set to 1). Thus, we
move our "unsupported" condition after having checked each bit field.

Also, it's simple enough to add a condition for ONFI revision 2.3. Note
that this does *NOT* mean we handle all new features of ONFI versions
above 1.0.

Signed-off-by: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Florian Fainelli <ffainelli@freebox.fr>
Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <David.Woodhouse@intel.com>
This commit is contained in:
Brian Norris 2010-12-12 00:23:33 -08:00 committed by David Woodhouse
parent 0b524fb931
commit b7b1a29d94
1 changed files with 12 additions and 8 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

20
drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
View File

@ -2865,20 +2865,24 @@ static int nand_flash_detect_onfi(struct mtd_info *mtd, struct nand_chip *chip,
/* check version */
val = le16_to_cpu(p->revision);
if (val == 1 || val > (1 << 4)) {
printk(KERN_INFO "%s: unsupported ONFI version: %d\n",
__func__, val);
return 0;
}
if (val & (1 << 4))
if (val & (1 << 5))
chip->onfi_version = 23;
else if (val & (1 << 4))
chip->onfi_version = 22;
else if (val & (1 << 3))
chip->onfi_version = 21;
else if (val & (1 << 2))
chip->onfi_version = 20;
else
else if (val & (1 << 1))
chip->onfi_version = 10;
else
chip->onfi_version = 0;
if (!chip->onfi_version) {
printk(KERN_INFO "%s: unsupported ONFI version: %d\n",
__func__, val);
return 0;
}
sanitize_string(p->manufacturer, sizeof(p->manufacturer));
sanitize_string(p->model, sizeof(p->model));