From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753327AbdLEK2T (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Dec 2017 05:28:19 -0500 Received: from mail.free-electrons.com ([62.4.15.54]:48058 "EHLO mail.free-electrons.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752952AbdLEK2R (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Dec 2017 05:28:17 -0500 Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 11:28:15 +0100 From: Boris Brezillon To: Masahiro Yamada Cc: Kamal Dasu , Richard Weinberger , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Broadcom Kernel Feedback List , Marek Vasut , Chen-Yu Tsai , linux-mtd , Cyrille Pitchen , Han Xu , Maxime Ripard , Brian Norris , David Woodhouse , linux-arm-kernel Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: nand: squash struct nand_buffers into struct nand_chip Message-ID: <20171205112815.0b59ab2d@bbrezillon> In-Reply-To: References: <1512366470-16772-1-git-send-email-yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> <20171204101043.602ff213@bbrezillon> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.14.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 19:02:26 +0900 Masahiro Yamada wrote: > Hi Boris, > > 2017-12-04 18:10 GMT+09:00 Boris Brezillon > : > > >> } > >> > >> if (!(chip->options & NAND_OWN_BUFFERS)) { > >> - nbuf = kzalloc(sizeof(*nbuf), GFP_KERNEL); > >> - if (!nbuf) > >> + chip->ecccalc = kmalloc(mtd->oobsize, GFP_KERNEL); > >> + if (!chip->ecccalc) > >> return -ENOMEM; > >> > >> - nbuf->ecccalc = kmalloc(mtd->oobsize, GFP_KERNEL); > >> - if (!nbuf->ecccalc) { > >> + chip->ecccode = kmalloc(mtd->oobsize, GFP_KERNEL); > >> + if (!chip->ecccode) { > >> ret = -ENOMEM; > >> goto err_free_nbuf; > >> } > > > > Hm, again not directly related to this patch, but I wonder if we > > couldn't allocate those buffers only when they are really needed. > > For example, most NAND controllers do the ECC calculation/correct > > in HW and simply don't need those buffers. > > > The only idea I came up with is to add a new flag, > but I am not sure if you are happy with it > because we are removing NAND_OWN_BUFFERS. All drivers using ->calc/code_buf are providing a ->correct() and/or ->calculate() method, so I thought we could make the allocation dependent on the presence of one of these hooks [1]. The only exception is the denali driver, but I think we can patch it to not use the ->code_buf buffer [2]. [1]http://code.bulix.org/2ks7yp-236649 [2]http://code.bulix.org/sxqx7o-236650