From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: [PATCH] [2.6.23] nand_flash_dev - add manufacturer ID From: David Woodhouse To: "Egor N. Martovetsky" In-Reply-To: <468D2DF8.4050609@pasemi.com> References: <200707032354.l63Ns7gh010492@escobita.pasemi.com> <1183507424.29081.73.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1183528554.3291.60.camel@chaos> <468D2DF8.4050609@pasemi.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 14:03:57 -0400 Message-Id: <1183658637.2756.9.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: olof@lixom.net, Thomas Gleixner , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, 2007-07-05 at 10:44 -0700, Egor N. Martovetsky wrote: > Right now, there is no way to uniquely identify the device and assign > options to it. I saw that as a potential future problem. Instead of > adding code to nand_get_flash_type() to special treat our device, I > thought it would be better to provide a general mechanism, which can > be used to prevent this in the future. This only affects the flashes > that need to be special cased. For the rest of them, manufacturer ID > is not specified and the match occurs purely on Device ID - as > before. Yeah, I can see the sense in what you're saying. I'm dubious about having to duplicate various chip idents just to give separate options though, when a single entry in the table along with some manufacturer-specific code to mask out/in certain features would do the same thing. -- dwmw2