[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 5/5] ARM: at91: atmel_nand: add code to check the ONFI parameter ECC requirement

[Scott Wood]

On 06/25/2013 01:33:32 AM, Josh Wu wrote:
> Hi, Dear Scott
> 
> On 6/21/2013 4:57 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
>> On 06/17/2013 05:51:21 AM, Josh Wu wrote:
>>> +static int pmecc_choose_ecc(struct atmel_nand_host *host,
>>> +        struct nand_chip *chip,
>>> +        int *cap, int *sector_size)
>>> +{
>>> +    /* Get ECC requirement from ONFI parameters */
>>> +    *cap = *sector_size = 0;
>>> +    if (chip->onfi_version) {
>>> +        if (!get_onfi_ecc_param(chip, cap, sector_size))
>>> +            pr_debug("ONFI params, minimum required ECC: %d bits  
>>> in %d bytes\n",
>>> +                *cap, *sector_size);
>>> +        else
>>> +            dev_info(NULL, "NAND chip ECC reqirement is in  
>>> Extended ONFI parameter, we don't support yet.\n");
>>> +    } else {
>>> +        dev_info(NULL, "NAND chip is not ONFI compliant, assume  
>>> ecc_bits is 2 in 512 bytes");
>>> +    }
>> 
>> Don't pass NULL to dev_info().  Either pass host->dev as the Linux  
>> code does (and use dev_dbg rather than pr_debug), or just use  
>> printf() (and debug()) if there's no intent to sync this change back  
>> to Linux.  It doesn't matter if host->dev doesn't exist in U-Boot,  
>> as the macro doesn't use that parameter, but the only reason to use  
>> Linux-style prints is to keep the code common with Linux.
> 
> understood. I prefer to use dev_xxx(host->dev, ...) to keep  
> consistent with kernel.
> 
> I use pr_debug because it is defined as MTDDEBUG in mtd/mtd.h, that  
> is exact what I want.
> Since if use debug(), then when I enable debug, there are many mtd  
> non-related message shows up.

If pr_debug() and dev_dbg() are behaving differently in U-Boot, that's  
a bug that should be fixed.

-Scott