On Tue, 21 Jan 2014 15:57:40 -0700, Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 06:03:01PM +0100, boris brezillon wrote: > > > >>Pick a mode value that fits all the parameters of the connected > > >>non-ONFI flash. > > >> > > >>This would be instead of defining each parameter > > >>individually.. Provide some helpers to convert from a onfi mode number > > >>to all the onfi defined timing parameters so that drivers can > > >>configure the HW.. > > > > > >Are you suggesting we should provide a function that converts these > > >modes into a nand_timings struct, or just use the timing modes and > > >let the NAND controller drivers configure its IP accordingly ? > > Either seems reasonable to me, but passing the ONFI mode directly from > the NAND core to the driver seems a little safer.. I agree here. There are a lot of parameters being defined. If it can be boiled down to an ONFI mode that will make for a much more robust binding. Far fewer things to get wrong. g. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
