Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932183Ab2JKOlw (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Oct 2012 10:41:52 -0400 Received: from mho-03-ewr.mailhop.org ([204.13.248.66]:11462 "EHLO mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751172Ab2JKOlq (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Oct 2012 10:41:46 -0400 X-Mail-Handler: Dyn Standard SMTP by Dyn X-Originating-IP: 98.234.237.12 X-Report-Abuse-To: abuse@dyndns.com (see http://www.dyndns.com/services/sendlabs/outbound_abuse.html for abuse reporting information) X-MHO-User: U2FsdGVkX1/H3vc6qvpum8hG8zKV0FlZ Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 07:41:37 -0700 From: Tony Lindgren To: Ivan Djelic Cc: "Philip, Avinash" , afzal@ti.com, "dwmw2@infradead.org" , "artem.bityutskiy@linux.intel.com" , "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] mtd: nand: omap2: Add data correction support Message-ID: <20121011144137.GA12552@atomide.com> References: <1349274589-11389-1-git-send-email-avinashphilip@ti.com> <1349274589-11389-5-git-send-email-avinashphilip@ti.com> <20121003192044.GB27502@parrot.com> <518397C60809E147AF5323E0420B992E3E9B8A65@DBDE01.ent.ti.com> <20121005142338.GA7199@parrot.com> <518397C60809E147AF5323E0420B992E3E9CA829@DBDE01.ent.ti.com> <20121010170806.GB13585@parrot.com> <518397C60809E147AF5323E0420B992E3E9CB751@DBDE01.ent.ti.com> <20121011082149.GA15609@parrot.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20121011082149.GA15609@parrot.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 934 Lines: 25 * Ivan Djelic [121011 01:23]: > > I don't know which way is better for the OMAP community: > 1. Unifying ECC modes = loosing the constant polynomial benefits, but gaining RBL compat and simplifying code > 2. Keeping separate ECC modes = code bloat > > Tony, do you have an opinion on this ? Well right now I'm mostly interested in making device drivers independent of the arch/arm/*omap*/* code. That's where Afzal's patches help quite a bit, so let's get those in first. So from that point of view, option #1 above sounds better as the first step :) Ideally of course option #1 should not limit us from adding extra features in the long run. Regards, Tony -- 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/