Re: [flashrom] [PATCH 1/3] serprog: add SPI support

[Uwe Hermann]

On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 12:56:21AM +0200, Stefan Tauner wrote:
> 0x13 (O_SPIOP):
> Send and receive bytes via SPI.
> Maximum slen is Q_WRNMAXLEN result after Q_BUSTYPE returns

^
                                                                      Full stop.
> only SPI or S_BUSTYPE == SPI is used. Same for rlen and Q_RDNMAXLEN.

^
             Capitalize
> +static struct spi_programmer spi_programmer_serprog = {
> .type = SPI_CONTROLLER_SERPROG,
> .max_data_read = MAX_DATA_READ_UNLIMITED,
> .max_data_write = MAX_DATA_WRITE_UNLIMITED,
> .command = serprog_spi_send_command,
> .multicommand = default_spi_send_multicommand,
> .read = serprog_spi_read,
> .write_256 = default_spi_write_256,
>
> +};

Please use the "aligned" style using tabs, see e.g.

"static const struct spi_programmer spi_programmer_linux"

in linux_spi.c.
> if (sp_docommand(S_CMD_Q_BUSTYPE, 0, NULL, 1, &c)) {
> msg_perr("Warning: NAK to query supported buses\n");

perr and "Warning" doesn't sound consistent, but can be fixed in
another patch.
> /* Success of any of these commands is optional. We dont need

dont -> don't
>    the programmer to tell us it's limits, but if it doesnt, we

it's -> its
doesnt -> doesn't
> if (!sp_docommand(S_CMD_Q_RDNMAXLEN, 0, NULL, 3, rbuf)) {
> 	uint32_t v;
> 	v = ((unsigned int)(rbuf[0]) << 0);
> 	v |= ((unsigned int)(rbuf[1]) << 8);
> 	v |= ((unsigned int)(rbuf[2]) << 16);

Why (unsigned int) and not (uint32_t)? This is done in multiple places.
> /* This could be translated to single byte reads (if missing),
>  * but now we dont support that. */

dont -> don't
> if (!sp_check_commandavail(S_CMD_O_DELAY)) {
> internal_delay(delay);
> msg_pdbg("Note: serprog_delay used, but the programmer doesnt support delay\n");

doesnt -> doesn't
> for(i = 0; i < len; ) {

^
        missing space

Otherwise
Acked-by: Uwe Hermann

Uwe.