From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com (Boris Brezillon)
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 19:34:41 +0100
Subject: [PATCH v2 3/3] mtd: nand: Remove unused chip->write_page() hook
In-Reply-To: <CAK7LNASNFJ6_LJBS7jyyJ3-Uv_ExTYAj+tkJTCYrpDz8_BXa3Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1487593718-20752-1-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>
 <1487593718-20752-4-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>
 <CAK7LNASNFJ6_LJBS7jyyJ3-Uv_ExTYAj+tkJTCYrpDz8_BXa3Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20170307193441.0c6fd555@bbrezillon>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Tue, 7 Mar 2017 21:04:50 +0900
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> wrote:

> Hi Boris,
> 
> 2017-02-20 21:28 GMT+09:00 Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>:
> > The last/only user of the chip->write_page() hook (the Atmel NAND
> > controller driver) has been reworked and is no longer specifying a custom  
> > ->write_page() implementation.  
> > Drop this hook before someone else start abusing it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>  
> 
> 
> Just a minor comment.
> 
> 
> /**
>  * nand_write_page - [REPLACEABLE] write one page
>  * @mtd: MTD device structure
> 
> 
> Can you update the comment block for nand_write_page(), too?
> 
>   [REPLACEABLE]  ->  [INTERNAL]

I think I'll just drop it, it does not mean anything to flag a static
function as replaceable (the ->write_page() method could be overloaded,
but not the nand_write_page() implementation itself).