From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from emailhub.stusta.mhn.de ([141.84.69.5] helo=mailout.stusta.mhn.de) by canuck.infradead.org with smtp (Exim 4.62 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1FvDLu-0007Av-VY for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 09:12:07 -0400 Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 15:11:16 +0200 From: Adrian Bunk To: Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] drivers/mtd/devices/: remove dead _ecc code Message-ID: <20060627131116.GL23314@stusta.de> References: <20060621215840.GP9111@stusta.de> <1150928664.25491.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1150928664.25491.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, dwmw2@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 12:24:24AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Wed, 2006-06-21 at 23:58 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > This patch removes some code that is dead code after the > > "Remove read/write _ecc variants" patch that went into Linus' tree. > > Holy cow, are you even remotly knowing what you are doing ? > > Removing the xxx_ecc function pointers from the mtd structs does not > remove the fundamental requirement of ECC for NAND FLASH. > > I'm just waiting for the follow up patches which remove nand_ecc and the > reed solomon library. >... nand_ecc isn't dead code. But if I do understand correctly, you have pending patches to let the code your patch made dead code and my patch would have removed be used again? cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed