From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ezequiel Garcia Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] mtd: nand: replace pxa3xx_nand driver by its rework called marvell_nand Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2017 01:55:04 -0300 Message-ID: References: <20171219132942.27433-1-miquel.raynal@free-electrons.com> <20171219132942.27433-4-miquel.raynal@free-electrons.com> <87608ycwx5.fsf@belgarion.home> <20171222230444.2c952ea0@bbrezillon> <87bmipb10z.fsf@belgarion.home> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <87bmipb10z.fsf-4ty26DBLk+jEm7gnYqmdkQ@public.gmane.org> Sender: devicetree-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Robert Jarzmik Cc: Boris Brezillon , Mark Rutland , Andrew Lunn , Catalin Marinas , Hanna Hawa , Will Deacon , Nadav Haklai , linux-mtd-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, Richard Weinberger , Russell King , Marek Vasut , Ezequiel Garcia , Sebastian Hesselbarth , devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Jason Cooper , Haojian Zhuang , Rob Herring , Miquel Raynal , Gregory Clement List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 23 December 2017 at 18:13, Robert Jarzmik wrote= : > Boris Brezillon writes: > >>> What I would propose instead is : >>> - keep both the new marvell nand driver and the old pxa3xx_nand driver >>> - switch pxa_defconfig to compile them both >> >> Didn't notice you were suggesting to compile both, which doesn't work >> because both drivers match the same devices, and only one of them >> can actually claim the device (likely the first one to register to the >> device model). So, to make it safe you need to have a >> >> depends on !MTD_NAND_PXA3xx >> >> in your MTD_NAND_MARVELL entry, which means only one driver can be >> compiled. > Mmm... that is I didn't explain to you what pxa_defconfig is designed for= . > This defconfig is not for any board actually, it rather is a build covera= ge > tool. > >> So let's find a way to fix the remaining issues you have instead of dela= ying >> the inevitable. > It's up to you of course, as long as my boards don't break, and nothing b= reaking > them is merged, I'm fine with it. It's just not the approach I usually ch= oose, > I'm rather a 2-step guy, ie. merge the new one, then merge the switch (wh= ich can > be reverted easilly). > I agree with Boris on this. Let's get this new driver tested as much as possible; then, once everyone is fairly happy with it, merge it. It won't be completely stable on day-one, but that is why we have -rc cycles. Plus, distributions and appliances use -stable. --=20 Ezequiel Garc=C3=ADa, VanguardiaSur www.vanguardiasur.com.ar -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html