On Mon, 2020-05-18 at 11:32 -0700, Steve deRosier wrote: > On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 7:00 AM Bean Huo <huobean@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > From: Bean Huo <beanhuo@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > On some legacy planar 2D Micron NAND devices when a block erase > > command > > I object the use of the qualifications you're putting in this > sentence. By saying "some legacy...." you're implying that there's a > set that does and a set that doesn't require this. Which then leads > the reader of this commit message to #1 look for which ones this > applies to vs not, and #2 want to remove/exclude the feature when > they're using a "current" device. The wiggle-word wording is > confusing > and dishonest. > > I've followed this discussion now intently and it seems like Micron > is > either unable or unwilling to determine which specific devices this > does or doesn't apply to. If you are unable to identify and restrict > this functionality to a specific subset of devices, then the fact is > it's "all." Let's just say that and eliminate the confusion. And > please also update your datasheets to indicate that this is the > correct algorithm for working with these devices. Better would be to > issue an errata on the chips and notify your customers. I feel for > those customers who aren't using Linux and don't know the reliability > problem they've been tracking down for the last couple of years is > already known but they don't have any way of knowing about it. > > In your commit message, rewording to "On planar 2D Micron NAND > devices > when a block erase command..." is sufficient. > > - Steve > ok, you are native English speaker, I will take this suggestion in the next version. thanks. Bean > ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/