From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mail-pa0-x22e.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22e])
 by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux))
 id 1ZrF7G-0007Jl-1y
 for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 01:01:26 +0000
Received: by pabla5 with SMTP id la5so45354876pab.0
 for <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>; Tue, 27 Oct 2015 18:01:05 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2015 18:01:02 -0700
From: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>
To: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>
Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
 Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com>,
 Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>, Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>,
 Josh Wu <josh.wu@atmel.com>, Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@free.fr>,
 Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@samsung.com>,
 Han Xu <han.xu@freescale.com>, Huang Shijie <shijie.huang@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] mtd: ofpart: grab device tree node directly from
 master device node
Message-ID: <20151028010102.GB13239@google.com>
References: <1445913070-17950-1-git-send-email-computersforpeace@gmail.com>
 <1445913070-17950-2-git-send-email-computersforpeace@gmail.com>
 <20151027084200.2434180f@bbrezillon>
 <20151027175446.GT13239@google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20151027175446.GT13239@google.com>
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, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:54:46AM -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 08:42:00AM +0100, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> > On Mon, 26 Oct 2015 19:31:06 -0700
> > I like the idea, but how about pushing the solution even further and
> > killing the ->flash_node field which AFAICT is rendered useless by
> > your patch?
> 
> I suppose we could do that. I do think there's something to be said for
> layering, though. Historically, we haven't done a very good job of
> layering in MTD, so low-level drivers often have to poke around in the
> MTD structures, even if they really should only have to know a few
> things about their helper subsystem/library, like NAND or SPI NOR. So
> with that in mind, I think the ->flash_node serves some purpose --
> drivers can just initialize struct nand_chip/spi_nor and be assured that
> the NAND/SPI-NOR subsystems will take care of things.
> 
> Now, I don't think there's much reason to suspect that we'd have a more
> complex mapping than 1:1 between struct mtd_info and struct nand_chip or
> struct spi_nor, so maybe we don't actually need duplicate storage
> (mtd.dev.of_node and {spi_nor,nand_chip}.flash_node), and the layering
> is just have these APIs:
> 
> 	nand_set_flash_node()
> 	spi_nor_set_flash_node()
> 
> which just call mtd_set_of_node()?

I looked at this quickly for NAND, and it's hard to do right now because
of the below quote. The SPI NOR layering is better though, so that
works. Mind if I defer the dropping the flash_node in NAND but do the
SPI NOR one?

> Speaking of layering: why do we have NAND drivers initializing mtd->priv
> for us, yet nand_base just assumes that it points to a struct nand_chip?
> And why isn't struct mtd_info just embedded in struct nand_chip? Are
> there ever cases we want more than one (master) MTD per nand_chip? Or
> vice versa?

The layering (or lack thereof) make it hard to extract a struct mtd_info
from a struct nand_chip.

Brian