Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1364608 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-03-25 10:00 +0100 |
| Last post | 2016-03-28 10:00 +0200 |
| Articles | 2 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH 00/11] mtd: nand_bbt: introduce independent nand BBT Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> - 2016-03-25 10:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH 00/11] mtd: nand_bbt: introduce independent nand BBT Peter Pan <peterpansjtu@gmail.com> - 2016-03-28 10:00 +0200
| From | Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-25 10:00 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 00/11] mtd: nand_bbt: introduce independent nand BBT |
| Message-ID | <rgvL3-7AD-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 02:47:53 +0000 Peter Pan <peterpansjtu@gmail.com> wrote: > Sorry for send the v3 out late. I went through a busy time in the past > two month. > > Currently nand_bbt.c is tied with struct nand_chip, and it makes other > NAND family chips hard to use nand_bbt.c. Maybe it's the reason why > onenand has own bbt(onenand_bbt.c). > > Separate struct nand_chip from BBT code can make current BBT shareable. > We create struct nand_bbt to take place of nand_chip in nand_bbt.c. > Struct nand_bbt contains all the information BBT needed from outside and > it should be embedded into NAND family chip struct (such as struct nand_chip). > > Below is mtd folder structure we want: > drivers/mtd/nand/<all-nand-core-code> > drivers/mtd/nand/raw/<raw-nand-controller-drivers> > drivers/mtd/nand/spi/<spi-nand-code> > drivers/mtd/nand/onenand/<onenand-code> > drivers/mtd/nand/chips/<manufacturer-spcific-code> Hm, we should have a chips directory under each interface type, because vendor specific handling is dependent on the NAND interface. Otherwise, yes, that's the idea. -- Boris Brezillon, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Pan <peterpansjtu@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-28 10:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rhAfD-3PC-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1364608 |
On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> wrote: > On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 02:47:53 +0000 > Peter Pan <peterpansjtu@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Sorry for send the v3 out late. I went through a busy time in the past >> two month. >> >> Currently nand_bbt.c is tied with struct nand_chip, and it makes other >> NAND family chips hard to use nand_bbt.c. Maybe it's the reason why >> onenand has own bbt(onenand_bbt.c). >> >> Separate struct nand_chip from BBT code can make current BBT shareable. >> We create struct nand_bbt to take place of nand_chip in nand_bbt.c. >> Struct nand_bbt contains all the information BBT needed from outside and >> it should be embedded into NAND family chip struct (such as struct nand_chip). >> >> Below is mtd folder structure we want: >> drivers/mtd/nand/<all-nand-core-code> >> drivers/mtd/nand/raw/<raw-nand-controller-drivers> >> drivers/mtd/nand/spi/<spi-nand-code> >> drivers/mtd/nand/onenand/<onenand-code> >> drivers/mtd/nand/chips/<manufacturer-spcific-code> > > Hm, we should have a chips directory under each interface type, because > vendor specific handling is dependent on the NAND interface. > Otherwise, yes, that's the idea. Update this in v4 Thanks, Peter Pan
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web