From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jagan Teki Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2015 12:32:20 +0530 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v8 14/14] sf: Rename sf_ops.c to spi-flash.c In-Reply-To: References: <1449426866-696-1-git-send-email-jteki@openedev.com> <1449426866-696-15-git-send-email-jteki@openedev.com> <566A6D14.80504@openedev.com> Message-ID: <566A74FC.6090105@openedev.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Friday 11 December 2015 12:21 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > Hi Jagan, > > On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Jagan Teki wrote: >> >> >> On Friday 11 December 2015 11:53 AM, Bin Meng wrote: >>> >>> Hi Jagan, >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 11:13 PM, Jagan Teki wrote: >>>> >>>> On 10 December 2015 at 07:01, Bin Meng wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 12:54 PM, Simon Glass wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 6 December 2015 at 11:34, Jagan Teki wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Since all spi-flash core operations are moved into >>>>>>> sf_ops.c then it's better to renamed as spi-flash.c >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> drivers/mtd/spi/Makefile | 2 +- >>>>>>> drivers/mtd/spi/{sf_ops.c => spi-flash.c} | 7 ++++--- >>>>>>> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >>>>>>> rename drivers/mtd/spi/{sf_ops.c => spi-flash.c} (99%) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Reviewed-by: Simon Glass >>>>>> >>>>>> (but I suggest spi_flash.c is better as it fits with the other files) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Agreed. spi_flash.c makes more sense. So far it looks that only driver >>>>> model uclass driver is using - in the file name, others are using _. >>>> >>>> >>>> Clear, but this file will handle common spi-flash core functionalities >>>> it shouldn't be dm even now or later and more over underlying sf_probe >>>> which is calling this through spi_flash_scan has a driver model on it. >>> >>> >>> Sorry, I don't quite understand what you mean. But my comment is to >>> rename sf_ops.c to sf_flash.c, not sf-flash.c. >> >> >> >> spi-flash.c (the function spi_flash_scan from sf_probe, so this never be a >> dm driver and it handles all core functionalities >> ====================================================================== >> sf_probe.c (this has dm support) >> ================================= >> >> Since you're saying dm has - and ie the reason I'm saying spi-flash.c should >> technically a dm supported core. >> > > I was saying it looks to me that only dm uclass driver is allowed to > have -, like sf-uclass.c or pci-uclass.c. Other files we should use _. sf_probe.c is a dm driver - agree? If ie the case probably this is the first file has a code moved from dm driver into different file which is spi-flash in this case. thanks! -- Jagan