Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 20 Nov 2014 10:14:33 -0800 | From | Brian Norris <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] mtd: nand: gpmi: add gpmi_move_bits function |
| |
On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 10:42:53AM +0100, Boris Brezillon wrote: > On Thu, 20 Nov 2014 01:22:09 -0800 Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:46:15AM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > > > Add a new function to move bits (not bytes) from a memory region to > > > another one. > > > This function is similar to memmove except it acts at bit level. > > > This function is needed to implement GPMI raw access functions, given the > > > fact that ECC engine does not pad ECC bits to the next byte boundary. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> > > > --- > > > drivers/mtd/nand/gpmi-nand/gpmi-lib.c | 129 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > drivers/mtd/nand/gpmi-nand/gpmi-nand.h | 4 + > > > 2 files changed, 133 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/gpmi-nand/gpmi-lib.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/gpmi-nand/gpmi-lib.c > > > index 87e658c..5d4f140 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/gpmi-nand/gpmi-lib.c > > > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/gpmi-nand/gpmi-lib.c > > > @@ -1353,3 +1353,132 @@ int gpmi_read_page(struct gpmi_nand_data *this, > > > set_dma_type(this, DMA_FOR_READ_ECC_PAGE); > > > return start_dma_with_bch_irq(this, desc); > > > } > > > + > > > +void gpmi_move_bits(u8 *dst, size_t dst_bit_off, > > > + const u8 *src, size_t src_bit_off, > > > + size_t nbits) > > > > Two things: > > > > 1) Yikes! This function is a little hairy. > > Yes I know, and if you see a much simpler algorithm to do that, I'm > really interested :-).
No ideas at the moment :)
> > 2) This function really deserves a full comment header (kerneldoc?); it > > needs to have clearly-documented high-level semantics. > > I'll add a kernel doc header. > > > > > I'm not sure how to address #1, as the complexity is necessary. Did you > > run this through some unit tests, at least? > > No, but I did test it with several ECC configs. > Anyway, if I develop such unit tests, do you want me to put them in the > driver code (under an #ifdef section) ?
I dunno, that seems like it might just clutter the file more, and I'm not sure if anyone is likely to run them. I was mostly curious how you've verified it.
Brian
| |