[PATCH] nand: Remove meaningless delay from nand_unlock

[PATCH] nand: Remove meaningless delay from nand_unlock

[jiri.pinkava]

From: Jiri Pinkava <jiri.pinkava@vscht.cz>

This delay is meaningless. If delay is needed it is device specific
and must be reimplemented by specific driver, otherwise no delay is
needed.

This function is not used by any current kernel code, affects only
external code (like main).

Signed-off-by: Jiri Pinkava <jiri.pinkava@vscht.cz>
---
 drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c |    2 --
 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
index a46e9bb..290a1db 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
@@ -919,7 +919,6 @@ static int __nand_unlock(struct mtd_info *mtd, loff_t ofs,
 
 	/* Call wait ready function */
 	status = chip->waitfunc(mtd, chip);
-	udelay(1000);
 	/* See if device thinks it succeeded */
 	if (status & 0x01) {
 		DEBUG(MTD_DEBUG_LEVEL0, "%s: Error status = 0x%08x\n",
@@ -1028,7 +1027,6 @@ int nand_lock(struct mtd_info *mtd, loff_t ofs, uint64_t len)
 
 	/* Call wait ready function */
 	status = chip->waitfunc(mtd, chip);
-	udelay(1000);
 	/* See if device thinks it succeeded */
 	if (status & 0x01) {
 		DEBUG(MTD_DEBUG_LEVEL0, "%s: Error status = 0x%08x\n",
-- 
1.7.5.2

Re: [PATCH] nand: Remove meaningless delay from nand_unlock

[Brian Norris]

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 6:56 AM,  <jiri.pinkava@vscht.cz> wrote:
> From: Jiri Pinkava <jiri.pinkava@vscht.cz>
>
> This delay is meaningless. If delay is needed it is device specific
> and must be reimplemented by specific driver, otherwise no delay is
> needed.
>
> This function is not used by any current kernel code, affects only
> external code (like main).

Looks ok to me, but I don't have hardware to test this with.

CC'ing Vimal who added this code originally.

Brian

Re: [PATCH] nand: Remove meaningless delay from nand_unlock

[Brian Norris]

On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Brian Norris
<computersforpeace@gmail.com> wrote:
> CC'ing Vimal who added this code originally.

Apparently I had the wrong address for Vimal...I think he has used
this one more recently.

Brian

Re: [PATCH] nand: Remove meaningless delay from nand_unlock

[Vimal Singh]

On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 9:53 PM, Brian Norris
<computersforpeace@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 6:56 AM,  <jiri.pinkava@vscht.cz> wrote:
>> From: Jiri Pinkava <jiri.pinkava@vscht.cz>
>>
>> This delay is meaningless. If delay is needed it is device specific
>> and must be reimplemented by specific driver, otherwise no delay is
>> needed.
Indeed, these delays are not required. I guess it was left out code
before posting the patch.
Here is my ack:

Acked-by: Vimal Singh <vimal.newwork@gmail.com>

-- 
Regards,
Vimal Singh

>>
>> This function is not used by any current kernel code, affects only
>> external code (like main).
>
> Looks ok to me, but I don't have hardware to test this with.
>
> CC'ing Vimal who added this code originally.
>
> Brian
>

Re: [PATCH] nand: Remove meaningless delay from nand_unlock

[Artem Bityutskiy]

On Wed, 2011-06-01 at 15:56 +0200, jiri.pinkava@vscht.cz wrote:
> From: Jiri Pinkava <jiri.pinkava@vscht.cz>
> 
> This delay is meaningless. If delay is needed it is device specific
> and must be reimplemented by specific driver, otherwise no delay is
> needed.
> 
> This function is not used by any current kernel code, affects only
> external code (like main).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Pinkava <jiri.pinkava@vscht.cz>

Pushed to l2-mtd-2.6.git, thanks.

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)

Re: [PATCH] nand: Remove meaningless delay from nand_unlock

[Artem Bityutskiy]

On Sun, 2011-04-10 at 04:30 +0200, jiri.pinkava@vscht.cz wrote:
> From: Jiří Pinkava <jiri.pinkava@vscht.cz>
> 
> This delay is meaningless. If delay is needed it is device specific
> and must be reimplemented by specific driver, otherwise no delay is needed.
> 
> This function is not used by any current kernel code, affects only
> external code (like main).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Pinkava <jiri.pinkava@vscht.cz>
> ---
>  drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c |    1 -
>  1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
> index 2aef58e..5b5aff5 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
> @@ -922,7 +922,6 @@ static int __nand_unlock(struct mtd_info *mtd, loff_t ofs,
>  
>  	/* Call wait ready function */
>  	status = chip->waitfunc(mtd, chip);
> -	udelay(1000);
>  	/* See if device thinks it succeeded */
>  	if (status & 0x01) {
>  		DEBUG(MTD_DEBUG_LEVEL0, "%s: Error status = 0x%08x\n",

Hi, it looks sane to remove this udelay. However,

1. If you do this, then you also have to do it in __nand_lock() - there
is a similar udelay()
2. Let's CC Vimal who is the author of this code - may be he'll tell us
why he added the delays.

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Битюцкий Артём)

[PATCH] nand: Remove meaningless delay from nand_unlock

[jiri.pinkava]

From: Jiří Pinkava <jiri.pinkava@vscht.cz>

This delay is meaningless. If delay is needed it is device specific
and must be reimplemented by specific driver, otherwise no delay is needed.

This function is not used by any current kernel code, affects only
external code (like main).

Signed-off-by: Jiri Pinkava <jiri.pinkava@vscht.cz>
---
 drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c |    1 -
 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
index 2aef58e..5b5aff5 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
@@ -922,7 +922,6 @@ static int __nand_unlock(struct mtd_info *mtd, loff_t ofs,
 
 	/* Call wait ready function */
 	status = chip->waitfunc(mtd, chip);
-	udelay(1000);
 	/* See if device thinks it succeeded */
 	if (status & 0x01) {
 		DEBUG(MTD_DEBUG_LEVEL0, "%s: Error status = 0x%08x\n",
-- 
1.7.4.4