Re: [PATCH] mtd: add a new macro about the subpage write

[Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>]

Dear Scott Wood,

> On 07/13/2012 11:08 AM, Huang Shijie wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote:
> >> Dear Huang Shijie,
> >> 
> >>> On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 6:35 AM, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote:
> >>>> Dear Huang Shijie,
> >>>> 
> >>>>> Hi Brian:
> >>>>>> Wood [1]; I don't see a good reason not to just kill the
> >>>>>> NAND_CHIPOPTIONS_MSK instead of adding more flags. As long as we
> >>>>>> perform a few sanity tests, I think it'd be safe.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> I think it's more clear in logic to add this new macro:
> >>>>>     The NAND_NO_SUBPAGE_WRITE can be used only by the MLC nands which
> >>>>>     do
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> no support the subpage write;
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>     The NAND_CONTROLLER_NO_SUBPAGE_WRITE only used by the nand
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> controller such as gpmi nand.
> >>>> 
> >>>> It's not clearer at all. It's just more error-prone.
> >>> 
> >>> ok, thanks. But I do not how to fix it now. I hope some one could give
> >>> a patch.
> >> 
> >> Why not remove the mask?
> > 
> > I do not understand why this line was added here,  was it added on
> > purpose? so I am not sure whether we can just remove this line.
> 
> If whoever wanted that line to be there cared enough, they could have
> justified it with a comment (in the code, in the changelog, or in one of
> these threads).  We can't just let cruft sit there (or worse, produce
> more cruft to work around existing cruft) just because we don't know
> exactly what the original author was thinking.  It appears to just have
> been a misguided attempt at enforcing any given option to come from only
> one place.

I think it was there to allow having two different chips on the same NAND bus 
... or something. But this is just a guess. Anyway, it proved irrelevant, so 
let's drop it.

> -Scott

Best regards,
Marek Vasut