All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>
Cc: Marco Felsch <m.felsch@pengutronix.de>,
	richard@nod.at, vigneshr@ti.com, arnd@arndb.de,
	gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kernel@pengutronix.de
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mtd: devices: add AT24 eeprom support
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2023 17:47:22 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231129174722.7d4e768c@xps-13> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMRc=MdsEWxJLHL__zYXGEMYvvLSH99GsTRv_NTaVXt2fGtNvg@mail.gmail.com>

Hello,

brgl@bgdev.pl wrote on Wed, 29 Nov 2023 10:10:28 +0100:

> On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 5:46 PM Marco Felsch <m.felsch@pengutronix.de> wrote:
> >  
> 
> [snip]
> 
> >
> > I dropped the backward compatibility since this is a new driver not
> > having to deal with it. The old and the new driver can not be used by
> > the same kernel config. So it is either using the MTD eeprom driver
> > supporting partitioning and NVMEM or the older one which does not
> > support partitioning but keeps the backward compatibility.
> >
> > Comments and suggestions are very welcome :)  
> 
> I skimmed through the code. Nothing obviously wrong. What I would
> suggest - if we're going to have two at24 drivers - is a lot more code
> reuse. I dislike the idea of having basically the same code in two
> places in the kernel and having to fix bugs in both.

Agreed.

> Though if I'm being honest - I would prefer a single driver with
> backwards compatibility. Have you estimated the effort it would take
> to abstract both nvmem and mtd?

Also agreed :-)

Thanks,
Miquèl

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>
Cc: Marco Felsch <m.felsch@pengutronix.de>,
	richard@nod.at, vigneshr@ti.com, arnd@arndb.de,
	gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kernel@pengutronix.de
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mtd: devices: add AT24 eeprom support
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2023 17:47:22 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231129174722.7d4e768c@xps-13> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMRc=MdsEWxJLHL__zYXGEMYvvLSH99GsTRv_NTaVXt2fGtNvg@mail.gmail.com>

Hello,

brgl@bgdev.pl wrote on Wed, 29 Nov 2023 10:10:28 +0100:

> On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 5:46 PM Marco Felsch <m.felsch@pengutronix.de> wrote:
> >  
> 
> [snip]
> 
> >
> > I dropped the backward compatibility since this is a new driver not
> > having to deal with it. The old and the new driver can not be used by
> > the same kernel config. So it is either using the MTD eeprom driver
> > supporting partitioning and NVMEM or the older one which does not
> > support partitioning but keeps the backward compatibility.
> >
> > Comments and suggestions are very welcome :)  
> 
> I skimmed through the code. Nothing obviously wrong. What I would
> suggest - if we're going to have two at24 drivers - is a lot more code
> reuse. I dislike the idea of having basically the same code in two
> places in the kernel and having to fix bugs in both.

Agreed.

> Though if I'm being honest - I would prefer a single driver with
> backwards compatibility. Have you estimated the effort it would take
> to abstract both nvmem and mtd?

Also agreed :-)

Thanks,
Miquèl

______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/

  reply	other threads:[~2023-11-29 16:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-11-27 16:46 [RFC PATCH] mtd: devices: add AT24 eeprom support Marco Felsch
2023-11-27 16:46 ` Marco Felsch
2023-11-29  9:10 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2023-11-29  9:10   ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2023-11-29 16:47   ` Miquel Raynal [this message]
2023-11-29 16:47     ` Miquel Raynal
2023-11-29 17:44     ` Arnd Bergmann
2023-11-29 17:44       ` Arnd Bergmann
2023-12-01 14:44       ` Marco Felsch
2023-12-01 14:44         ` Marco Felsch

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20231129174722.7d4e768c@xps-13 \
    --to=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=brgl@bgdev.pl \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=m.felsch@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=richard@nod.at \
    --cc=vigneshr@ti.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.