Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Message-ID: <a9529da36e73116a65a9bc8bd40b5ef54661e3d1.camel@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/5] mtd: rawnand: micron: Micron SLC NAND filling
 block
From:   Bean Huo <huobean@gmail.com>
To:     Steve deRosier <derosier@gmail.com>
Cc:     Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>, s.hauer@pengutronix.de,
        Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@collabora.com>,
        linux-mtd <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Bean Huo <beanhuo@micron.com>
Date:   Tue, 19 May 2020 11:16:25 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CALLGbR+MWz82hcC6jrv+MrH6Rhj5McW5vt9V+x4UhiZdsoqkRg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20200518135943.11749-1-huobean@gmail.com>
         <20200518135943.11749-6-huobean@gmail.com>
         <CALLGbR+MWz82hcC6jrv+MrH6Rhj5McW5vt9V+x4UhiZdsoqkRg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 2020-05-18 at 11:32 -0700, Steve deRosier wrote:
> On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 7:00 AM Bean Huo <huobean@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > From: Bean Huo <beanhuo@micron.com>
> > 
> > On some legacy planar 2D Micron NAND devices when a block erase
> > command
> 
> I object the use of the qualifications you're putting in this
> sentence. By saying "some legacy...." you're implying that there's a
> set that does and a set that doesn't require this. Which then leads
> the reader of this commit message to #1 look for which ones this
> applies to vs not, and #2 want to remove/exclude the feature when
> they're using a "current" device. The wiggle-word wording is
> confusing
> and dishonest.
> 
> I've followed this discussion now intently and it seems like Micron
> is
> either unable or unwilling to determine which specific devices this
> does or doesn't apply to. If you are unable to identify and restrict
> this functionality to a specific subset of devices, then the fact is
> it's "all."  Let's just say that and eliminate the confusion. And
> please also update your datasheets to indicate that this is the
> correct algorithm for working with these devices. Better would be to
> issue an errata on the chips and notify your customers. I feel for
> those customers who aren't using Linux and don't know the reliability
> problem they've been tracking down for the last couple of years is
> already known but they don't have any way of knowing about it.
> 
> In your commit message, rewording to "On planar 2D Micron NAND
> devices
> when a block erase command..." is sufficient.
> 
> - Steve
> 
ok, you are native English speaker, I will take this suggestion in the
next version.

thanks.
Bean

>