From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from hauke-2-pt.tunnel.tserv6.fra1.ipv6.he.net ([2001:470:1f0a:465::2] helo=hauke-m.de) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1WHXHl-00088K-JN for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Sun, 23 Feb 2014 11:31:54 +0000 Message-ID: <5309DBF4.50305@hauke-m.de> Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 12:31:00 +0100 From: Hauke Mehrtens MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3] mtd: bcm47xxnflash: adding support for new NANDs References: <1393154819-7369-1-git-send-email-zajec5@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1393154819-7369-1-git-send-email-zajec5@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 02/23/2014 12:26 PM, Rafał Miłecki wrote: > New Broadcom SoCs have NAND flashes attached & programmed in a totally different > way. Instead of accessing them with help of ChipCommon core, they can be used > directly. > > To support them we can extend bcm47xxnflash in the way this patches implements. > However almost nothing in the code will be shared between support for old and > new devices. > > How should we proceed? Implement it that way anyway? Or maybe writing a > separated driver (bcm53xxnflash?) would be a better idea? > Hi, if this controller is completely different I would suggest writing a new driver for that controller. Extending the existing driver would make if just more complex. Hauke