[PATCH 10/12] mtd: nand: davinci: don't set timings if AEMIF is used

[Santosh Shilimkar]

On Thursday 14 November 2013 05:53 AM, Nori, Sekhar wrote:
> On Wednesday 13 November 2013 07:44 PM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>> On Wednesday 13 November 2013 12:02 AM, Sekhar Nori wrote:
>>> On Monday 11 November 2013 10:40 PM, Khoronzhuk, Ivan wrote:
>>>> If Davinci AEMIF is used we don't need to set timings and bus width.
>>>> It is done by AEMIF driver (drivers/memory/davinci-aemfi.c).
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk at ti.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>  drivers/mtd/nand/davinci_nand.c |   22 +++++++++++++++-------
>>>>  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/davinci_nand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/davinci_nand.c
>>>> index 4705214..879e915 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/davinci_nand.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/davinci_nand.c
>>>> @@ -742,27 +742,35 @@ static int __init nand_davinci_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>>                 goto err_clk_enable;
>>>>         }
>>>>
>>>> +#if !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_TI_DAVINCI_AEMIF)
>>>
>>> This is a hack! Just because AEMIF driver is enabled, it does not
>>> guarantee that the timings have been setup by it. Instead of configuring
>>> timings in two drivers, why not just convert everyone over to use the
>>> new driver. Dont worry about breaking old platforms, I will help test
>>> and ack them.
>>>
>> How about you take a stab at and convert the DaVinci code over to make
>> use of new driver. We are trying to re-use as much as possible from the
>> common drivers and also making an option so that the DaVinci arch can
>> move over to these drivers if they want to.
> 
> Sure I could.
> 
Thanks

> Ivan,
> 
> The AEMIF driver does not use platfrom_data currently. Is that something
> you can add or you want me to take a stab at that as well?
> 
The AEMIF new driver is device tree only and thats the direction. So the
better thing would be to convert Davinci to DT and then make use of this
new driver. Thats how most of the new drivers used on arm socs are
moving. Adding platform data to new driver is a step in backward
direction so I would want to avoid that.

Once you start using new driver the $subject patch code skipping
is trivial. Till then I would like to proceed with current approach
which allows Nand support for Keystone.

Regards,
Santosh