From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Zhong Hongbo <bocui107@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 21:00:54 +0800
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 02/13] S3C64XX: Switch to use readl/writel to
 operate nand flash
In-Reply-To: <4FFC2015.508@gmail.com>
References: <1341655032-30201-1-git-send-email-bocui107@gmail.com>
	<1341655032-30201-3-git-send-email-bocui107@gmail.com>
	<4FFB5902.3040305@freescale.com> <4FFC2015.508@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4FFC2786.7000204@gmail.com>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

On 07/10/2012 08:29 PM, Zhong Hongbo wrote:
> On 07/10/2012 06:19 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
>> On 07/07/2012 04:57 AM, Zhong Hongbo wrote:
>>> +static inline unsigned int s3c64xx_get_base_nand(void)
>>> +{
>>> +	return ELFIN_NAND_BASE;
>>> +}
>>
>> unsigned long or uintptr_t would be more appropriate, even if U-Boot is
>> unlikely to be 64-bit any time soon.
> 
> Ok, I will fix it in V2.
> 
> Thanks,
> hongbo
>>
>> Or better, "struct s3c64xx_nand *".
>>
>>> @@ -89,15 +96,16 @@ static void s3c_nand_select_chip(struct mtd_info *mtd, int chip)
>>>   */
>>>  static void s3c_nand_hwcontrol(struct mtd_info *mtd, int cmd, unsigned int ctrl)
>>>  {
>>> +	struct s3c64xx_nand *const nand = s3c_get_base_nand();
>>
>> Is there any benefit to declaring local variables const like this?
> 
> I reference the nand driver of S5PXX CPU. So ...
Sorry, I make a mistake, The S5PXX have not nand flash support. When i
do the patch, I use the format as following?

struct s3c64xx_nand *nand = s3c_get_base_nand();

But when I use checkpatch.pl script to check the patch. more and more
waring about the line, it said that you should add 'const' before nand
variable.

Thanks,
hongbo
> 
>   Why
>> this one and not all the others that never get altered?
> 
> Ok, I will change it. And i just found the S3c64XX is orphaned board.
> So Thanks you for the foucus it!
> 
> Thanks,
> hongbo
>>
>> -Scott
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 
>