From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21835 invoked by alias); 19 May 2009 16:29:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 21827 invoked by uid 22791); 19 May 2009 16:29:17 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from londo.lunn.ch (HELO londo.lunn.ch) (80.238.139.98) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 19 May 2009 16:29:07 +0000 Received: from lunn by londo.lunn.ch with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1M6SBR-0003zM-00; Tue, 19 May 2009 18:28:53 +0200 Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 16:29:00 -0000 From: Andrew Lunn To: Simon Kallweit Cc: "ecos-devel@ecos.sourceware.org" Subject: Re: NAND review Message-ID: <20090519162853.GA27459@lunn.ch> References: <4A126D59.7070404@intefo.ch> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4A126D59.7070404@intefo.ch> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact ecos-devel-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-devel-owner@ecos.sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-05/txt/msg00034.txt.bz2 On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 10:27:05AM +0200, Simon Kallweit wrote: > Hi there > > * Ross's code uses the directory 'io/nand' for the NAND framework and > adds the NAND flash device drivers in 'devs/nand'. This is contrary to > what was discussed on the mailing list a few months ago: > > http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss/2008-09/msg00172.html > > I still think that the naming scheme by Ross (and what Rutger originally > intended to do) is the better approach. Because when we mix the flash > chip drivers for NOR and NAND chips in one directory (devs/flash) it's > rather easy to get confused. At the time we discussed this i did not have that strong an opinion. And i think i was the only person who did express an opinion. I would not complain about this naming scheme if that is what people want. Andrew