From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-db9lp0249.outbound.messaging.microsoft.com ([213.199.154.249] helo=db9outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1V97wn-0006hz-Qe for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 13 Aug 2013 06:19:15 +0000 Message-ID: <5209CFFD.8000501@freescale.com> Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 14:19:41 +0800 From: Huang Shijie MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Gupta, Pekon" Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] mtd: set the cell information for ONFI nand References: <1376286173-12581-1-git-send-email-b32955@freescale.com> <1376286173-12581-2-git-send-email-b32955@freescale.com> <20980858CB6D3A4BAE95CA194937D5E73E9F2A6B@DBDE04.ent.ti.com> <20130813004938.GD7267@brian-ubuntu> <5209A1F2.80600@freescale.com> <20130813031702.GI7267@brian-ubuntu> <20980858CB6D3A4BAE95CA194937D5E73E9F4137@DBDE04.ent.ti.com> In-Reply-To: <20980858CB6D3A4BAE95CA194937D5E73E9F4137@DBDE04.ent.ti.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "dwmw2@infradead.org" , Brian Norris , "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" , "dedekind1@gmail.com" List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , =E4=BA=8E 2013=E5=B9=B408=E6=9C=8813=E6=97=A5 12:10, Gupta, Pekon =E5=86=99= =E9=81=93: >> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 11:03:14AM +0800, Huang Shijie wrote: >>> =E4=BA=8E 2013=E5=B9=B408=E6=9C=8813=E6=97=A5 08:49, Brian Norris =E5= =86=99=E9=81=93: >>> currently), we should modify it so that is a reliable source of >>> *only* 1 >>> piece of information -- the number of bits per cell. Currently,= it >>> do you need to rename the cellinfo to bits_per_cell, or add a new fie= ld : >>> bits_per_cell? >> Well, my whole point was that 'cellinfo' is really not very useful for >> us. We just mask it off all the time, and it makes life more >> complicated. >> >> So I'd just rename cellinfo to bits_per_cell and change its >> assignment/usage appropriately. >> > [Pekon]: How about moving 'bit_per_cell' info to chip->options ? sorry, i do not think this is a good idea. the drivers may changes the chip->options. I prefer to keep it as new field. thanks Huang Shijie