From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.bootlin.com ([62.4.15.54]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1gH7lY-0001h4-6m for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 13:39:37 +0000 Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 14:39:24 +0100 From: Miquel Raynal To: Boris Brezillon Cc: Richard Weinberger , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, David Woodhouse , Brian Norris , Marek Vasut , Han Xu , Masahiro Yamada , Tudor Ambarus , Harvey Hunt , Xiaolei Li , Maxim Levitsky , Marc Gonzalez , Stefan Agner Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/15] mtd: rawnand: Add nand_[de]select_target() helpers Message-ID: <20181029143924.7ed5dc4f@xps13> In-Reply-To: <20181029143647.2efe60cb@xps13> References: <20181023185011.3356-1-boris.brezillon@bootlin.com> <20181023185011.3356-7-boris.brezillon@bootlin.com> <20181029143647.2efe60cb@xps13> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Miquel Raynal wrote on Mon, 29 Oct 2018 14:36:47 +0100: > Hi Boris, >=20 > Boris Brezillon wrote on Tue, 23 Oct 2018 > 20:50:02 +0200: >=20 > > Add a wrapper to prevent drivers and core code from directly calling > > the ->select_chip hook which we are about to deprecate. > >=20 > > Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon > > --- > > drivers/mtd/nand/raw/gpmi-nand/gpmi-nand.c | 23 +++-- > > drivers/mtd/nand/raw/jz4740_nand.c | 4 +- > > drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c | 114 ++++++++++++++------- > > drivers/mtd/nand/raw/r852.c | 4 +- > > include/linux/mtd/rawnand.h | 4 + > > 5 files changed, 98 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-) > > =20 >=20 > So far I am glad to see all these changes. >=20 > About the ->select_chip() removal, I wonder if it would not be better > to also change the local variables "chipnr" or "chip_number" (or > even "i") that suggest that this ID selects a chip, while it > actually selects a die in a chip (and it is possible to have multiple > die on a chip, so multiple CS for one single NAND chip). >=20 > Do you think it is worth the change ? If yes, would it fit in this patch > or is it better to do this change elsewhere? >=20 This request actually applies to the following patches as well. Maybe we could even find a uniform way to name it, "die_nr" or something like this? Miqu=C3=A8l