[PATCH v3 26/27] [ARM] [NAND] [bcmring] add bcmring umi nand driver support

[Scott Branden]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Artem Bityutskiy [mailto:dedekind1 at gmail.com] 
> Sent: August 9, 2009 12:27 AM
> To: Scott Branden
> Cc: Artem Bityutskiy; Leo (Hao) Chen; 
> linux-mtd at lists.infradead.org; linux-arm-kernel at lists.arm.linux.org.uk
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 26/27] [ARM] [NAND] [bcmring] add 
> bcmring umi nand driver support
> 
> On 08/09/2009 10:12 AM, Scott Branden wrote:
> > Hi Artem,
> >
> > Thanks for the comments.
> >
> > This particular code (nand_bcm_umi.h) is shared between 
> multiple OS's, 
> > simulation environments, and non-OS's.  As you are aware, 
> this alone 
> > presents maintenance challenges.  The simplest approach was 
> to make an 
> > include file and wrap that for each particular environment.
> > We will look at splitting this into a C and H file.
> 
> Well, the idea is that include/linux/mtd the external MTD 
> interface, so you should put only the stuff which is about 
> MTD<->other subsystems.
> There are also headers that are about MTD core <-> MTD 
> drivers interface.
> 
> So if you need to share something between different parts of 
> your driver, this should be rather in drivers/mtd/nand/, not 
> in include/linux/mtd.
>

Understood - it looks like nand_bcm_umi.h is in the incorrect location.  We will move it to drivers/mtd/nand and adjust Makefiles accordingly.

 
> > The file passes Linux's checkpatch scripts.  I don't see a need for 
> > any further requirement?  It would be sad if a particular linux 
> > maintainer was stuck on other stylistic concerns because other 
> > maintainers are not.  Especially when this code is not specifically 
> > written for linux and is supported, tested, and maintained by us.
> 
> I do not have a strong opinion here, and I'm personally fine 
> with this.
> I mean, I do not mind if you ignore my /**...**/ and 
> 'WindowsStyleVars'
> comment.
> 
> --
> Best Regards,
> Artem Bityutskiy (áÒÔ£Í âÉÔÀÃËÉÊ)
> 
>