On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 04:51:20PM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > Due to the way the 'nand-disk' LED trigger is implemented, > it currently does not work correctly for all NAND drivers. > > This is somewhat related to an old thread, where we discussed > the addition of an "mtd" LED trigger. See: > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-leds/msg01181.html > > My question is: > > * given that nobody has complained about "nand-disk" > working on just some NAND drivers, and... > * given that nobody has complained (except that 2013 patch) > about lacking a generic MTD LED trigger... > > Does it make any sense to have such a trigger at all? > In other words, should we simply get rid of "nand-disk" trigger? I don't have much opinion about the LED trigger, except that it'd be nice if it either worked consistently or was removed. > In case the answer is "We want to keep some LED trigger", > then here's a patch for you to f̶l̶a̶m̶e̶ review: > > From 88c7102bb67056b443da323bd3e28b60aca948a2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2016 18:35:50 -0300 > Subject: [PATCH] leds: trigger: Introduce a MTD (NAND/NOR) trigger > > This commit introduces a MTD trigger for flash (NAND/NOR) device > activity. The implementation is copied from IDE disk. > > This deprecates the "nand-disk" LED trigger, but for backwards > compatibility, we still keep the "nand-disk" trigger around. > > The motivation for deprecating the "nand-disk" LED trigger is that > it only works for NAND drivers, whereas the "mtd" LED trigger > is more generic (in fact, "nand-disk" currently only works for > certain NAND drivers). > > TODO: Measure how the trigger affects MTD I/O performance. > It should be cheap because the blink is deferred, but still > it makes sense to provide some hard numbers. > > Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [...] Notably, your patch changes the behavior pretty significantly. Instead of triggering for individual NAND wait periods (very fine-grained) you only trigger for entire write/read/erase operations. That may be OK, especially if it's modelled after IDE. I'd also note that you missed a few APIs (e.g., mtd_{read,write}_oob()). Brian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-leds" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
