[PATCH (mtd-www) 06/13] nand-data: fix name for Samsung "K9XDG08U5D"

[Brian Norris]

On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 3:38 AM, Angus CLARK <angus.clark at st.com> wrote:
> On 12/07/2011 07:38 PM, Brian Norris wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 4:07 AM, Angus CLARK <angus.clark at st.com> wrote:
>>> Change Samsung "K9XDG08U5D" to "K9MDG08U5D".
>>
>> According to my data sheet, all the following are available:
>>
>> K9LBG08U0D
>> K9HCG08U1D
>> K9MDG08U5D
>> K9PDGZ8U5D
>> K9PDG08U5D
>>
>> While they use "K9XDG08U5D" to cover the last 3 chips with the same ID
>> under the "Read ID" section, with `X' as a wildcard character. So it
>> should match K9MDG08U5D, K9PDG08U5D, and K9PDGZ8U5D.
>>
>
> Ah, that makes sense, or at least for the K9MDG08U5D and K9PDG08U5D devices.  I
> can't find much information relating to K9PDGZ8U5D - the part number decoder I
> have suggests this would be 'SSD' technology (rather than x8 or x16).  Can you
> shed any light on this?

Not really. I've never seen the K9PDGZ8U5D, and judging by the 'SSD',
it probably wouldn't fit into our classifications too well.

> I see the datasheet uses capital 'X' as the wildcard, but perhaps lower-case 'x'
> (or '-' as you have suggested in other replies) would be less confusing.

I'd go with lowercase 'x'

> Also, although the K9MDG08U5D and K9PDG08U5D devices are equivalent with respect
> to the current columns in the table, one of the later patches I submitted added
> the "I/O interface" column: this is "Single" for the K9MDG08U5D device and
> "Dual" for the K9PDG08U5D device.
>
> Would you object to us keeping this patch as is, and I will add K9PDG08U5D as a
> separate device, with "Dual" I/O?

No, I guess not. That means we leave out K9PDGZ8U5D, which is fine with me.

Brian