Hi Paul, Paul Cercueil <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on Wed, 13 Mar 2019 23:22:56 +0100: > Use the 'ecc-engine' standard property instead of the custom > 'ingenic,bch-controller' custom property, which is now deprecated. > > Signed-off-by: Paul Cercueil <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > > Notes: > v5: New patch > > drivers/mtd/nand/raw/ingenic/ingenic_ecc.c | 13 ++++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/ingenic/ingenic_ecc.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/ingenic/ingenic_ecc.c > index d7f3a8c3abea..30436ca6628a 100644 > --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/ingenic/ingenic_ecc.c > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/ingenic/ingenic_ecc.c > @@ -82,9 +82,9 @@ static struct ingenic_ecc *ingenic_ecc_get(struct device_node *np) > > /** > * of_ingenic_ecc_get() - get the ECC controller from a DT node > - * @of_node: the node that contains a bch-controller property. > + * @of_node: the node that contains a ecc-engine property. Would "contains an ecc-engine property" be better English? I am not sure what is the rule when it comes to plain English with variable names. However if you agree, no need to re-send the series, I can fix it when applying. BTW, I added hw ECC engines support to my generic ECC engine implementation, but migrating the whole raw NAND subsystem (using I/O requests like in the SPI-NAND core, adding prepare/finish_io_req hooks) is going to be much more invasive than initially expected, so I am not sure I will finish the migration any time soon. Thanks, Miquèl
