Messages in this thread | | | From | <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] mtd: spi-nor: Move Software Write Protection logic out of the core | Date | Wed, 17 Mar 2021 09:30:23 +0000 |
| |
On 3/17/21 10:21 AM, Michael Walle wrote: > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe > > Am 2021-03-17 07:09, schrieb Tudor.Ambarus@microchip.com: >> 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@microchip.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@microchip.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? > > It's just an internal name, thus as long as it remotely makes sense, > I'm fine. It's just a matter of taste, isn't it?
Sure, it's a matter of preference. What's yours?
> > But here's one technical reason that would bother me more: name > clashes between the core modules: core, sfdp, otp, swp and the > vendor names. It is very unlikely, but there is a non-zero chance ;) >
We can move all manufacturers to a manufacturers/ folder. Each manufacturer driver will have to #include "../core.h", about what I have some mixed feelings.
| |