Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755378AbbEUI6G (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 May 2015 04:58:06 -0400 Received: from mail-ob0-f170.google.com ([209.85.214.170]:32838 "EHLO mail-ob0-f170.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753643AbbEUI6D convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 May 2015 04:58:03 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20150515195541.GL11598@ld-irv-0074> <20150518104501.GD3551@leverpostej> <20150518183442.GR11598@ld-irv-0074> <20150519013415.GV11598@ld-irv-0074> <20150520213546.GN11598@ld-irv-0074> <20150521072515.GC11112@norris-Latitude-E6410> <20150521081526.GG11112@norris-Latitude-E6410> Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 10:58:01 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: R5y8yp0gcl2KyG0oYkWwmWmxeFE Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: dt: mtd: replace "nor-jedec" binding with "jedec,spi-nor" From: Geert Uytterhoeven To: =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= Cc: Brian Norris , "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Stephen Warren , Marek Vasut , linux-spi Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2425 Lines: 62 Hi Rafal, On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 10:50 AM, Rafał Miłecki wrote: >>>> I think your comments suggest that I shouldn't be removing "spi-nor" >>>> from m25p_ids[] nor from this block: >>>> >>>> if (data && data->type) >>>> flash_name = data->type; >>>> else if (!strcmp(spi->modalias, "spi-nor")) >>>> flash_name = NULL; /* auto-detect */ >>>> else >>>> flash_name = spi->modalias; >>>> >>>> So it stays in both m25p_ids[] and .of_match_table. >>>> >>>> I suppose that can work. It then allows people to do weird stuff like: >>>> >>>> compatible = "idontknowwhatimdoing,spi-nor"; >>>> >>>> in their device tree. But other than that, there's not much downside I don't >>>> think. >>> >>> It sounds like a reasonable solution. I guess there isn't a perfect >>> one. Even if we decide to go for sth like "jedec-spi-nor", there >>> always will be a chance of someone using >>> compatible = "idontknowwhatimdoing,jedec-spi-nor"; >>> So if you rework your patch to leave "spi-nor" support in m25p_ids and >>> conditions block, it should be OK. >> >> Typically platform devices just use the driver's name. Hence IMHO there's >> no need to add a shiny new spi-nor device name. >> >> So what's wrong with using "m25p80", and treating that as auto-detect iff >> !spi->dev.of_node? > > Treating "m25p80" as auto-detect triggering string won't allow > platform to *force* "m25p80" flash type if there ever appears to be > needed. Maybe it's unlikely, but it still sounds like a bit bad design > for me. To force m25p80 flash, you set flash_platform_data.type to "m25p80"? >> Non-autodetect platform_devices use flash_platform_data.type anyway, >> and thus fall under the first "if" clause above, don't they? > > They do, but I don't see the point. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/