Hi Ezequiel, >From: Ezequiel Garcia >>On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 05:58:13PM +0000, Gupta, Pekon wrote: [...] >> Yes, this is good approach. >> It was found earlier that generic NAND DT bindings are not much use to other >> controllers as well, as different h/w engines have different interpretations. >> Brian Norris had similar comments giving example of his hardware. >> (hope following reference helps). >> >> [1] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2013-September/048869.html >> > >Yes, Brian suggested this ecc-strength/ecc-size approach on IRC. > >Pekon, do you think this binding proposal is good enough to describe OMAP NAND >ECC mode? > >I'm not implying we should deprecate the recently added "ti-nand-ecc-opt", >but just want to know it's eventually possible. > Yes, this is good approach for long-term, and it can replace "ti-nand-ecc-opt" "ti-nand-ecc-opt" is not new DT binding, it just got some new values added However, you have to convince DT Maintainers to get this in, and then deprecate other vendor specific bindings. It would be difficult to maintain backward compatibility to these bindings, if we move to 'nand-ecc-strength'. At some-point we need to get some concrete guidelines from DT Maintainers on how long we should support deprecated bindings in our code, And what is the age of DT binding. I think David Woodhouse should throw more light, as he had some discussions & ideas on about DT binding life, during a linux conference. with regards, pekon ��.n��������+%������w��{.n����z�{��ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
