From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_2 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85404C2D0A8 for ; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 16:03:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 442B7207E8 for ; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 16:03:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726667AbgI1QDt (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Sep 2020 12:03:49 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:54628 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726424AbgI1QDt (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Sep 2020 12:03:49 -0400 Received: from bhuna.collabora.co.uk (bhuna.collabora.co.uk [IPv6:2a00:1098:0:82:1000:25:2eeb:e3e3]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E4424C061755 for ; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 09:03:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2a01:e0a:2c:6930:5cf4:84a1:2763:fe0d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: bbrezillon) by bhuna.collabora.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3C3B5297FEC; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 17:03:47 +0100 (BST) Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2020 18:03:43 +0200 From: Boris Brezillon To: Miquel Raynal Cc: Thirumalesha N , Richard Weinberger , Vignesh Raghavendra , Shivamurthy Shastri , Chuanhong Guo , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] mtd: spinand: micron: Generalize the function and structure names Message-ID: <20200928180343.4c5302a5@collabora.com> In-Reply-To: <20200928175005.48783b61@xps13> References: <20200913161533.10655-1-nthirumalesha7@gmail.com> <20200913161533.10655-2-nthirumalesha7@gmail.com> <20200915101321.1afa5033@xps13> <20200928165528.54e5db6e@xps13> <20200928174505.75fda272@collabora.com> <20200928175005.48783b61@xps13> Organization: Collabora X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.6 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 28 Sep 2020 17:50:05 +0200 Miquel Raynal wrote: > > > The way OOB > > > bytes are organized do not seem relevant to me, I think i prefer the > > > "_4_/_8_" naming,even if it's not very explicit. > > > > The ECC strength doesn't say anything about the scheme used for ECC > > bytes placement, and you might end up with 2 different schemes > > providing the same strength, or the same scheme used for 2 different > > strengths. > > So perhaps both should be present in the name? No, the point was to re-use the same functions for various strengths if they use the same ECC placement scheme.