From: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@free.fr>
To: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar>
Cc: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>,
"linux-mtd\@lists.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: nand: pxa3xx-nand: prevent DFI bus lockup on removal
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2015 13:07:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87pp261hfz.fsf@belgarion.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAEAJfDCUGDbssCkQEazcJLuvJWjbSxKDix9ts4peSZ8Xk1ZOA@mail.gmail.com> (Ezequiel Garcia's message of "Fri, 28 Aug 2015 19:46:09 -0300")
Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar> writes:
> Robert,
>
> On 24 August 2015 at 15:24, Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@free.fr> wrote:
>> Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar> writes:
>>
>>> Should we worry about having two definitions for the same bit?
>>> Would it be too ugly to mix the two meaning? Something like this:
>>>
>>> /* This bit has two different meanings on NFCv1 and NFCv2 */
>>> #define NDCR_STOP_ON_UNCOR_ARB_CNTL (0x1 << 19)
>> I don't find that very pretty, but if you want I can put that in the patch
>> instead.
>>
>
> Yeah, it's far from pretty.
>
> OK, another idea. How about this:
>
> #define NFCV2_NDCR_STOP_ON_UNCOR (0x1 << 19)
> #define NFCV1_NDCR_ARB_CNTL (0x1 << 19)
This one looks much more prettier, I'll take it.
> That'll work. Feel free to send a v2.
Okay, I'm on my way.
Cheers.
--
Robert
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-08-29 11:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-23 19:05 [PATCH] mtd: nand: pxa3xx-nand: prevent DFI bus lockup on removal Robert Jarzmik
2015-08-24 15:08 ` Ezequiel Garcia
2015-08-24 18:24 ` Robert Jarzmik
2015-08-28 22:46 ` Ezequiel Garcia
2015-08-29 11:07 ` Robert Jarzmik [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87pp261hfz.fsf@belgarion.home \
--to=robert.jarzmik@free.fr \
--cc=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com \
--cc=ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox