On Fri, Jul 01, 2011 at 03:53:13PM +0800, Huang Shijie wrote:

Hi:

quoted

Hi Arnd,

quoted

If you really want to call out obsceneties, how about the fact that this
driver comes with an 805 line patch to add a HAL for a single chip!

Such abstractions should not be introduced as long as there is only
a single instance of the hardware.

If I understood correctly, most if not all upcoming i.MX will have the GPMI
(mx50, mx6). Huang, do you already have a draft for the mx50-hal?

I have finished the code for mx50's GPMI.
And I am coding for the MX6's GPMI recently.

I need a separate mx50-hal (or mx60-hal) to make the code tidy.
The MX50 and mx60 support ONFI NAND and TOGGLE nand(which mx23/mx28
do not support),
they need a long code to initialize the TIMING register. What's
more, the READ/WRITE functions
are different from the mx23/mx28.

Frankly speaking, I can merge the mxs-hal.c file to the gpmi-nfc.c,
but don't you think it too
messy?

Is it possible to post the mx50 code (as RFC with a note saying that it
is not ready yet and is not intended to be merged) so we can see better?

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Wolfram Sang                |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20110701/cd5f6c2d/attachment.sig>