[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9fd4957d-778c-966e-2756-13418d199bf6@ti.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 21:44:25 +0530
From: Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>
To: Pratyush Yadav <p.yadav@...com>, <Tudor.Ambarus@...rochip.com>
CC: <michael@...le.cc>, <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
<miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>, <richard@....at>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] mtd: spi-nor: Move Software Write Protection logic
out of the core
On 3/17/21 2:35 PM, Pratyush Yadav wrote:
> On 17/03/21 06:09AM, Tudor.Ambarus@...rochip.com wrote:
>> On 3/15/21 8:23 AM, Vignesh Raghavendra wrote:
>>> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
>>>
>>> On 3/9/21 12:58 PM, Tudor.Ambarus@...rochip.com wrote:
>>>> On 3/8/21 7:28 PM, Vignesh Raghavendra wrote:
>>>>> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/6/21 3:20 PM, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
>>>>>> It makes the core file a bit smaller and provides better separation
>>>>>> between the Software Write Protection features and the core logic.
>>>>>> All the next generic software write protection features (e.g. Individual
>>>>>> Block Protection) will reside in swp.c.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/Makefile | 2 +-
>>>>>> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c | 407 +---------------------------------
>>>>>> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.h | 4 +
>>>>>> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/swp.c | 419 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>
>>>>> Hmmm, name swp.c does not seem intuitive to me. How about expanding it a
>>>>> bit:
>>>>>
>>>>> soft-wr-protect.c or software-write-protect.c ?
>>
>> Having in mind that we have the SWP configs, I think I prefer swp.c.
>> But let's see what majority thinks, we'll do as majority prefers.
>> Michael, Pratyush?
>
> I don't have much of an opinion on this tbh. But I usually prefer short
> names so I'd go with swp.c here. Maybe also add a comment at the top of
> the file mentioning the full name "Software Write Protection logic" or
> something similar for clarification.
>
I don't have hard objection to swp.c. As Pratyush suggested, a comment
at top of the file indicating the purpose would be good to have.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists