From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marek Vasut Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/8] mtd: spi-nor: copy the SPI NOR commands to a new header file Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2014 14:36:43 +0100 Message-ID: <201403051436.43830.marex@denx.de> References: <1393238262-8622-1-git-send-email-b32955@freescale.com> <5316B9F2.8050301@freescale.com> <20980858CB6D3A4BAE95CA194937D5E73EAAFCDB@DBDE04.ent.ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20980858CB6D3A4BAE95CA194937D5E73EAAFCDB@DBDE04.ent.ti.com> Sender: linux-doc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Gupta, Pekon" Cc: Huang Shijie , "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" , "dwmw2@infradead.org" , "angus.clark@st.com" , "shawn.guo@linaro.org" , "b44548@freescale.com" , "broonie@linaro.org" , "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" , "b18965@freescale.com" , "linux-spi@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "Poddar, Sourav" , "computersforpeace@gmail.com" , "lee.jones@linaro.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Wednesday, March 05, 2014 at 08:24:21 AM, Gupta, Pekon wrote: > Hi Marek, Shijie, >=20 > >From: Huang Shijie [mailto:b32955@freescale.com] > > > >=E4=BA=8E 2014=E5=B9=B403=E6=9C=8805=E6=97=A5 11:43, Marek Vasut =E5= =86=99=E9=81=93: > >> Why didn't you keep it like that? Was there some reason for that ? > > > >http://marc.info/?l=3Dlinux-arm-kernel&m=3D138545182232220&w=3D4 > > > >Pekon suggestted do not touch the m25p80.c. > >So i just copy these commands to a new header. > >Anyway, it's really not an important issue for me. :) >=20 > My opinion was that we should not touch m25p80.c because: > (1) As m25p80 is already working for various vendors. So unless mult= iple > platforms start using SPI NOR framework, m25p80.c should remain > untouched. (2) we should not clutter header file with vendor specific > op-codes as used in m25p80. I was of the opinion that instead of > hard-coding the vendor specific info as MACROs, such information shou= ld be > taken from DT or platform-data. >=20 > However, this was my thought during initial versions of SPI NOR patch= es. > But now if you think that SPI NOR is stable enough that same header i= nfo > can be reused without conflicts, then no problems. >=20 > (Apologies to Huang Shijie for re-work :-) ). Ah, thanks for explaining, understood. Given that the m25p80.c is rewor= ked later=20 in the series anyway, I'm mostly OK with this patch ... even though I'd= prefer=20 to see no duplication throughout the series ;-) Best regards, Marek Vasut