[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87pp261hfz.fsf@belgarion.home>
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2015 13:07:28 +0200
From: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr>
To: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@...guardiasur.com.ar>
Cc: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia@...e-electrons.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
"linux-mtd\@lists.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: nand: pxa3xx-nand: prevent DFI bus lockup on removal
Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@...guardiasur.com.ar> writes:
> Robert,
>
> On 24 August 2015 at 15:24, Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr> wrote:
>> Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@...guardiasur.com.ar> writes:
>>
>>> Should we worry about having two definitions for the same bit?
>>> Would it be too ugly to mix the two meaning? Something like this:
>>>
>>> /* This bit has two different meanings on NFCv1 and NFCv2 */
>>> #define NDCR_STOP_ON_UNCOR_ARB_CNTL (0x1 << 19)
>> I don't find that very pretty, but if you want I can put that in the patch
>> instead.
>>
>
> Yeah, it's far from pretty.
>
> OK, another idea. How about this:
>
> #define NFCV2_NDCR_STOP_ON_UNCOR (0x1 << 19)
> #define NFCV1_NDCR_ARB_CNTL (0x1 << 19)
This one looks much more prettier, I'll take it.
> That'll work. Feel free to send a v2.
Okay, I'm on my way.
Cheers.
--
Robert
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists