On 05/02/2014 12:15, Grant Likely wrote:

On Wed, 29 Jan 2014 14:53:32 -0300, Ezequiel Garcia [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

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? It seems I've missed the
discussion...

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

Sorry, binding review has become a huge undertaking.

quoted

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.

I'm okay with either, but the above binding is indeed more readable.

That's fine by me, if everybody agrees, let's go for the
nand-ecc-strength/nand-ecc-size couple then.

I'll rebase next version of my series on Ezequiel's patch providing
these OF helpers.

Best Regards,

Boris

g.