From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from top.free-electrons.com ([176.31.233.9]
 helo=mail.free-electrons.com)
 by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux))
 id 1WFrFB-0006Ju-Ib
 for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 20:26:18 +0000
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 17:25:53 -0300
From: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com>
To: Boris BREZILLON <b.brezillon.dev@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] of_mtd: Add helpers to get ECC strength and ECC
 step size
Message-ID: <20140218202552.GB13799@localhost>
References: <1392749474-12936-1-git-send-email-ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com>
 <1392749474-12936-2-git-send-email-ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com>
 <5303BC07.2090300@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <5303BC07.2090300@gmail.com>
Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>,
 Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list <linux-mtd.lists.infradead.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/options/linux-mtd>,
 <mailto:linux-mtd-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/>
List-Post: <mailto:linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linux-mtd-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd>,
 <mailto:linux-mtd-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=subscribe>

On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 09:01:11PM +0100, Boris BREZILLON wrote:
> Le 18/02/2014 19:51, Ezequiel Garcia a écrit :
> > This commit adds simple helpers to obtain the devicetree properties
> > that specify the ECC strength and ECC step size to use on a given
> > NAND controller.
> 
> As already discussed with you, IMHO these 2 properties should both
> be available to be meaningful, hence, we should provide an helper
> function that gets both properties or return an error if one of them
> is missing.
> 

I think this way is both cleaner and simpler. I don't see the advantage
of having a single function.

> Do you plan to provide a default value (within controller drivers) if one
> of these properties is missing ? In this case seperating the helper
> functions make sense.
> 

Being a general framework, we can't know what drivers will want to do,
which is why I usually like helper function to say as simple as
policy-free as possible.
-- 
Ezequiel García, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android Engineering
http://free-electrons.com