On Wed, 27 May 2020 09:57:32 +0200 Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Maybe I misunderstood your request, you were saying that allocating a > "best data interface object" would be good, so I interpreted it as: > rename it, and allocated it dynamically. I'm fine keeping > data_interface and just declaring it as a pointer. Correct, renaming it into best_iface_cfg is probably good, but then, maybe we should have a current_iface_cfg, so the core/drivers always have a pointer to the currently applied config (which after a reset can be the reset config for a short period of time). > > Anyway, I like talking about the "interface" rather than the "interface > configuration" which is implied in my mind, I saw you were asking to > add "configuration" sometimes, do you have something in mind that I > don't? Well, to me a configuration is something that you can manipulate without necessarily implying it's the current state the HW operates in. For a configuration to be active, you have to apply it. And that's pretty much what the nand_data_interface describes, a configuration, that can be retrieved, tweaked, and finally applied. Hence the renaming I suggest. ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/