Hello Ezequiel

Le 29/01/2014 18:53, Ezequiel Garcia a ?crit :

On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 03:34:13PM +0100, Boris BREZILLON wrote:

quoted

nand-ecc-level property statically defines NAND chip's ECC requirements.

Signed-off-by: Boris BREZILLON <redacted>
---
  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/nand.txt |    3 +++
  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/nand.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/nand.txt
index 03855c8..0c962296 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/nand.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/nand.txt

@@ -3,5 +3,8 @@
  - nand-ecc-mode : String, operation mode of the NAND ecc mode.
    Supported values are: "none", "soft", "hw", "hw_syndrome", "hw_oob_first",
    "soft_bch".
+- nand-ecc-level : Two cells property defining the ECC level requirements.
+  The first cell represent the strength and the second cell the ECC block size.
+  E.g. : nand-ecc-level = <4 512>; /* 4 bits / 512 bytes */
  - nand-bus-width : 8 or 16 bus width if not present 8
  - nand-on-flash-bbt: boolean to enable on flash bbt option if not present false

Hm.. when was this proposal agreed?

Never, this is a proposal based on my needs, and this was not present in the
1st version of this series :-).

It seems I've missed the
discussion...

FWIW, we've already proposed an equivalent one, but it received no
feedback from the devicetree maintainers:

http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.devicetree/58764

Maybe we can discuss about it now?

   nand-ecc-strength : integer ECC required strength.
   nand-ecc-size : integer step size associated to the ECC strength.

   vs.

   nand-ecc-level : Two cells property defining the ECC level requirements.
   The first cell represent the strength and the second cell the ECC block size.
   E.g. : nand-ecc-level = <4 512>; /* 4 bits / 512 bytes */

It's really the same proposal but with a different format, right?

Yes it is.

IMHO, the former is more human-readable, but other than that I see no
difference.

As I already said to Pekon, I won't complain if my proposal is not chosen,
as long as there is a proper way to define these ECC requirements ;-).

Best Regards,

Boris

Brian? DT-guys?