From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: grant.likely@secretlab.ca (Grant Likely) Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 18:44:39 -0700 Subject: [PULL] of nand generic binding In-Reply-To: <4F576602.8020808@gmail.com> References: <20120217155707.GR1214@game.jcrosoft.org> <20120229152534.GH3318@game.jcrosoft.org> <20120307082945.GJ21255@game.jcrosoft.org> <4F576602.8020808@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20120309014439.235C23E0901@localhost> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 07:43:30 -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > On 03/07/2012 02:29 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > > On 16:25 Wed 29 Feb , Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > >> On 16:57 Fri 17 Feb , Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > >>> HI, > >>> > >>> please find attached the generic binding for the MTD nand > >>> > >>> This will add boolean and nand helpers > >> is it ok? > > I need this for 3.4 > > > > will you apply it or can I apply it via AT91 > > Looks fine to me and Grant acked it, so go ahead and take with your at91 > branch. Actually, taking another look at the of_mtd patch, that stuff really belongs in the drivers/mtd directory. I'm not nacking the patch, but you should send a follow up to move it into the correct place. I don't like the of_property_read_bool patch. I don't want the of_property_read_ functions to mix data return and error codes. Either return a bool with an error code in the parameter list, or the other way around. Otherwise we'll end up with the same problem as APIs that use the ERR_PTR() pattern where callers will use it without understanding that the return value isn't necessarily a bool. g. > > Rob > > > > > Best Regards, > > J. > > _______________________________________________ > > devicetree-discuss mailing list > > devicetree-discuss at lists.ozlabs.org > > https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss > -- email sent from notmuch.vim plugin