Re: [RESEND PATCH v3 19/20] mtd: spi-nor: Introduce spi_nor_get_flash_info()

[Vignesh Raghavendra]

On 26/08/19 5:39 PM, Tudor.Ambarus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> From: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Dedicate a function for getting the pointer to the flash_info
> const struct. Trim a bit the spi_nor_scan() huge function.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---

Reviewed-by: Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@xxxxxx>

Regards
Vignesh

> v3: no changes
> 
>  drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c | 76 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
>  1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c
> index d13317d1f372..ec70b58294ec 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c
> @@ -4766,10 +4766,50 @@ static int spi_nor_set_addr_width(struct spi_nor *nor)
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> +static const struct flash_info *spi_nor_get_flash_info(struct spi_nor *nor,
> +						       const char *name)
> +{
> +	const struct flash_info *info = NULL;
> +
> +	if (name)
> +		info = spi_nor_match_id(name);
> +	/* Try to auto-detect if chip name wasn't specified or not found */
> +	if (!info)
> +		info = spi_nor_read_id(nor);
> +	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(info))
> +		return ERR_PTR(-ENOENT);
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * If caller has specified name of flash model that can normally be
> +	 * detected using JEDEC, let's verify it.
> +	 */
> +	if (name && info->id_len) {
> +		const struct flash_info *jinfo;
> +
> +		jinfo = spi_nor_read_id(nor);
> +		if (IS_ERR(jinfo)) {
> +			return jinfo;
> +		} else if (jinfo != info) {
> +			/*
> +			 * JEDEC knows better, so overwrite platform ID. We
> +			 * can't trust partitions any longer, but we'll let
> +			 * mtd apply them anyway, since some partitions may be
> +			 * marked read-only, and we don't want to lose that
> +			 * information, even if it's not 100% accurate.
> +			 */
> +			dev_warn(nor->dev, "found %s, expected %s\n",
> +				 jinfo->name, info->name);
> +			info = jinfo;
> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +	return info;
> +}
> +
>  int spi_nor_scan(struct spi_nor *nor, const char *name,
>  		 const struct spi_nor_hwcaps *hwcaps)
>  {
> -	const struct flash_info *info = NULL;
> +	const struct flash_info *info;
>  	struct device *dev = nor->dev;
>  	struct mtd_info *mtd = &nor->mtd;
>  	struct device_node *np = spi_nor_get_flash_node(nor);
> @@ -4800,37 +4840,9 @@ int spi_nor_scan(struct spi_nor *nor, const char *name,
>  	if (!nor->bouncebuf)
>  		return -ENOMEM;
>  
> -	if (name)
> -		info = spi_nor_match_id(name);
> -	/* Try to auto-detect if chip name wasn't specified or not found */
> -	if (!info)
> -		info = spi_nor_read_id(nor);
> -	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(info))
> -		return -ENOENT;
> -
> -	/*
> -	 * If caller has specified name of flash model that can normally be
> -	 * detected using JEDEC, let's verify it.
> -	 */
> -	if (name && info->id_len) {
> -		const struct flash_info *jinfo;
> -
> -		jinfo = spi_nor_read_id(nor);
> -		if (IS_ERR(jinfo)) {
> -			return PTR_ERR(jinfo);
> -		} else if (jinfo != info) {
> -			/*
> -			 * JEDEC knows better, so overwrite platform ID. We
> -			 * can't trust partitions any longer, but we'll let
> -			 * mtd apply them anyway, since some partitions may be
> -			 * marked read-only, and we don't want to lose that
> -			 * information, even if it's not 100% accurate.
> -			 */
> -			dev_warn(dev, "found %s, expected %s\n",
> -				 jinfo->name, info->name);
> -			info = jinfo;
> -		}
> -	}
> +	info = spi_nor_get_flash_info(nor, name);
> +	if (IS_ERR(info))
> +		return PTR_ERR(info);
>  
>  	nor->info = info;
>  
> 

-- 
Regards
Vignesh