On 10/06/2011 04:06 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear "Hitz, Christian", > > In message > <CD1B567EF015FE41B29FF476B8600DDD26BBF25B89@vsrv-mail01.newtechgroup.local> > you wrote: >> This patch synchronizes the nand driver with the Linux 3.0 state. >> >> Signed-off-by: Christian Hitz <christian.h...@aizo.com> >> --- >> drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c | 578 >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------- >> drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c | 423 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------- >> drivers/mtd/nand/nand_ecc.c | 560 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- >> include/linux/mtd/bbm.h | 29 ++- >> include/linux/mtd/nand.h | 378 ++++++++++++++++------------ >> include/linux/string.h | 46 +++- >> lib/string.c | 461 ++++++++++++++++++++-------------- >> 7 files changed, 1709 insertions(+), 766 deletions(-)
What do the string changes have to do with synchronizing the NAND driver? How much does this update affect image size? This may be a good time to start ifdeffing portions of the NAND code based on what's actually needed by the target. > Checkpatch says: > > total: 662 errors, 1167 warnings, 3783 lines checked > > Please clean up and resubmit. Thanks. It looks like the entire patch is whitespace-mangled. That said, if there are any remaining checkpatch complaints due to the way the code already exists in Linux, I don't think we should make a local change to U-Boot just to keep checkpatch happy. -Scott _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
