Re: [PATCH 3/3] mtd/nand : workaround for Freescale FCM to support large-page Nand chip
From: Scott Wood <hidden>
Date: 2011-12-05 19:46:33
Also in:
lkml
On 12/05/2011 12:47 AM, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
On Sun, 2011-12-04 at 12:31 +0800, shuo.liu@freescale.com wrote:quoted
+ /* + * Freescale FCM controller has a 2K size limitation of buffer + * RAM, so elbc_fcm_ctrl->buffer have to be used if writesize + * of chip is greater than 2048. + * We malloc a large enough buffer (maximum page size is 16K). + */ + elbc_fcm_ctrl->buffer = kmalloc(1024 * 16 + 1024, GFP_KERNEL); + if (!elbc_fcm_ctrl->buffer) { + dev_err(dev, "failed to allocate memory\n"); + mutex_unlock(&fsl_elbc_nand_mutex); + ret = -ENOMEM; + goto err; + }Sorry for returning to this again and agian - I do not have time to dig suggest you the right solutions on the one hand, you do not provide me a good answer on the other hand (or I forgot?). 16KiB pages do not even exist I believe.
Googling turns up some hints of it, but nothing concrete such as a datasheet. We can assume 8K max for now and adjust it later, as the need becomes clear.
And you kmalloc 33KiB or RAM
17KiB, or 9KiB if we forget about 16K-page NAND.
although in most cases you need only 5KiB. I think this is wrong - what is the very strong reason of wasting RAM you have? Why you cannot allocate exactly the required amount of RAM after 'nand_scan_ident()' finishes and you know the page size?
Because this is a controller resource, shared by multiple NAND chips that may be different page sizes (even if not, it's adding another point of synchronization required between initialization of different chips). I don't think it's worth the gymnastics to save a few KiB. -Scott