On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 10:15:29PM +0200, Lucas Stach wrote: > Am Dienstag, den 21.07.2015, 14:05 -0700 schrieb Brian Norris: > > > +Optional properties: > > > +- nvidia,wp-gpios: GPIO used to disable write protection of the flash > > > > I think write-protect is a pretty common function, so we might want to > > just remove the 'nvidia,' prefix, so we can eventually move your code to > > the core nand_base.c library (BTW, I noticed you grab the GPIO, but you > > don't do anything with it; is that intentional?). In fact, I've seen > > requests for that very feature on the mailing list. > > > > Actually I request and activate the GPIO in the driver, so the chip is > permanently unprotected. Whoops, I missed that part. I'm not too familiar with the GPIO API. Thanks for clearing that up. > I agree that it would be nice to integrate this better into the NAND > core. If it's okay for you I'll drop the nvidia prefix and follow up > with patches to move this to the core after this driver is in. I don't > really want this driver get blocked on more dependencies. Perfect. Yes, sorry for the delays, and I think most things look really good, actually. And I guess I wasn't clear: I'd only ask you to change the binding name now, since we can't change that later; the code can be moved at a later time, once the DT ABI is set. FWIW, there are other features that might be useful alongside common NAND write-protect support. For instance, a user might want to gain a little extra safety by having MTD bring WP# low only when erasing/writing, so that most of the time, the flash is protected. Brian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
