From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtpauth03.csee.onr.siteprotect.com ([64.26.60.137]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1MU3kI-0003AZ-Lz for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 23 Jul 2009 19:14:31 +0000 Message-ID: <4A68B683.5030503@boundarydevices.com> Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 12:14:11 -0700 From: Troy Kisky MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 2/2] mtd: nand: Calculate better default ecc layout References: <1247789948-5764-1-git-send-email-troy.kisky@boundarydevices.com> <1247789948-5764-2-git-send-email-troy.kisky@boundarydevices.com> In-Reply-To: <1247789948-5764-2-git-send-email-troy.kisky@boundarydevices.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dedekind@infradead.org, david-b@pacbell.net, tglx@linutronix.de List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Troy Kisky wrote: > Have nand_base calculate a good ecc layout > default. A benefit of this is allowing > a software ecc other than 3 bytes long. For example, > 4 bit software ecc correction. > > This patch should be safe because it adds new > routines to be used. As board maintainers verify > that the new routines work for them, they should > send in a patch changing > > nand_scan -> nand_scan_finish > nand_scan_tail -> nand_scan_finish_tail Maybe nand_probe_common, and nand_probe_common_tail are better names ? > > This patch will also add all oob bytes that > are not reserved for ecc or bad block markers > to the end of the free list. I don't think this > can cause problems, but I would like an authority > to say, "Yes, it's safe." What do you think of leaving nand_base totally alone and add a file nand_probe.h which contain the new routines marked as inline, or mark it __devinit or __init ? I don't think anyone but probe calls these functions.