[PATCH V2 1/2] nvmem: core: refactor .cell_post_process() CB arguments
miquel.raynal at bootlin.com
Mon Nov 28 00:30:34 PST 2022
michael at walle.cc wrote on Mon, 28 Nov 2022 08:35:24 +0100:
> Am 2022-11-28 07:59, schrieb Rafał Miłecki:
> > From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal at milecki.pl>
> > Pass whole NVMEM cell struct and length pointer as arguments to > callback
> > functions.
> > This allows:
> > 1. Cells content to be modified based on more info
> > Some cells (identified by their names) contain specific data that
> > needs further processing. This can be e.g. MAC address stored in an
> > ASCII format. NVMEM consumers expect MAC to be read in a binary > form.
> > More complex cells may be additionally described in DT. This change
> > allows also accessing relevant DT nodes and reading extra info.
> > 2. Adjusting data length
> > If cell processing results in reformatting it, it's required to
> > adjust length. This again applies e.g. to the MAC format change from
> > ASCII to the byte-based.
Michael's series brings read_post_process, isn't what you need here?
> > Later on we may consider more cleanups & features like:
> > 1. Dropping "const char *id" and just using NVMEM cell name
> > 2. Adding extra argument for cells providing multiple values
> > Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <rafal at milecki.pl>
> > ---
> > This solution conflicts with 1 part of Michael's work:
> > [PATCH v2 00/20] nvmem: core: introduce NVMEM layouts
> > https://email@example.com/
> > Instead of:
> > 1. Adding NVMEM cell-level post_process callback
> > 2. Adding callback (.fixup_cell_info()) for setting callbacks
> > 3. Dropping NVMEM device-level post_process callback
> > I decided to refactor existing callback.
> > Michael's work on adding #nvmem-cell-cells should be possible to easily
> > rebase on top of those changes.
Yeah, I guess since Michael's series has been out for 2 years and we
finally agreed on the bindings plus some implementation points, I would
expect it to be merged very soon (I don't know if Srinivas still plans
to take it for this release or for the next?) unless someone speaks up
> As yours should be easily added on top of my series. I've showed that
> providing a global post process hook is bad because that way you need
> to have *all* cells of your device read-only.
More information about the linux-mtd