[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230718111906.7a69c320@xps-13>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2023 11:19:06 +0200
From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
To: Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com>
Cc: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
Alban Bedel <albeu@...e.fr>,
Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@...il.com>,
linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Rafał Miłecki <rafal@...ecki.pl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "nvmem: add new config option"
Hi Rafał,
zajec5@...il.com wrote on Tue, 18 Jul 2023 10:48:04 +0200:
> From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@...ecki.pl>
>
> This reverts commit 517f14d9cf3533d5ab4fded195ab6f80a92e378f.
>
> It seems that "no_of_node" config option was added to help mtd's case.
>
> DT nodes of MTD partitions (that are also NVMEM devices) may contain
> subnodes that SHOULD NOT be treated as NVMEM fixed cells. To prevent
> NVMEM core code from parsing them "no_of_node" was set to true and that
> made for_each_child_of_node() in NVMEM a no-op.
>
> With the introduction of "add_legacy_fixed_of_cells" config option
> things got more explicit. MTD subsystem simply tells NVMEM when to look
> for fixed cells and there is no need to hack "of_node" pointer anymore.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@...ecki.pl>
Reviewed-by: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
Thanks,
Miquèl
Powered by blists - more mailing lists