From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
llvm@lists.linux.dev, kbuild-all@lists.01.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [mtd:spi-mem-ecc 30/30] ld.lld: error: undefined symbol: nand_ecc_unregister_on_host_hw_engine
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2022 22:31:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220202223149.25ddc760@xps13> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YfrHs81VGzUggPC6@sirena.org.uk>
Hi Mark,
broonie@kernel.org wrote on Wed, 2 Feb 2022 18:04:35 +0000:
> On Wed, Feb 02, 2022 at 06:35:00PM +0100, Miquel Raynal wrote:
>
> > > depends on MTD=y if SPI_MXC=y
>
> > In this case I believe we should also add
>
> > depends on MTD=m if SPI_MXC=m ?
>
> It doesn't specifically need MTD to be a module so just a straight
> dependency should be fine I guess.
>
> > Anyway, this would force building the ECC support (and MTD...) even
> > though we don't need it in most cases.
>
> > My idea was to give people the right to only select SPI_MXIC without
> > really caring about MTD/ECC support at all because this is IMHO a
> > valid use case. We would then save a few kiB of extra MTD fat.
>
> Is that something that people actually do - does this controller get
> used without the MTD functionality? Most of these controllers seem to
> be really bad generic SPI controllers that would rarely get used for
> anything other than MTD devices, if this one is a useful generic
> controller your approach makes more sense although I do worry about
> people getting noticably worse performance if they don't build MTD in.
This one in particular really is a SPI controller, and can really be
used without MTD at all. I don't know how good are the performances
with it but it is sure that there is no performance hit when the MTD
stack is not pulled in.
Also, for the example I mentioned CONFIG_MTD but in fact I simplified a
bit the situation as this driver is actually implying
CONFIG_MTD_NAND_ECC which selects CONFIG_MTD_NAND_CORE.
CONFIG_MTD_NAND_CORE is a subset of MTD. Building this subset
really is not needed when playing with eg. a SPI-NOR. And even with a
SPI-NAND which would require CONFIG_MTD_NAND_CORE anyway, it would not
be necessarily to have CONFIG_MTD_NAND_ECC enabled because most NANDs
have on-die support for it and thus do not need extra code to handle
bitflips.
That is the reason why I felt a bit puzzled in the first place by the
need to pull all MTD in a build which would select this SPI controller
driver.
Thanks,
Miquèl
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-02 21:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-01 5:28 [mtd:spi-mem-ecc 30/30] ld.lld: error: undefined symbol: nand_ecc_unregister_on_host_hw_engine kernel test robot
2022-02-02 14:45 ` Miquel Raynal
2022-02-02 15:20 ` Mark Brown
2022-02-02 15:34 ` Miquel Raynal
2022-02-02 16:15 ` Mark Brown
2022-02-02 17:35 ` Miquel Raynal
2022-02-02 18:04 ` Mark Brown
2022-02-02 21:31 ` Miquel Raynal [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=20220202223149.25ddc760@xps13 \
--to=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=kbuild-all@lists.01.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
/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