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 06:09:17 +0000 |
| |
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?
>>> >>
cut
> > I am not a fan of renaming Kconfig options as it breaks make > olddefconfig flow which many developers rely on. >
I'm fine keeping them as they are for now. If someone else screams we will reconsider.
| |