On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Boris Brezillon <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 02:47:53 +0000 > Peter Pan <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Sorry for send the v3 out late. I went through a busy time in the past >> two month. >> >> Currently nand_bbt.c is tied with struct nand_chip, and it makes other >> NAND family chips hard to use nand_bbt.c. Maybe it's the reason why >> onenand has own bbt(onenand_bbt.c). >> >> Separate struct nand_chip from BBT code can make current BBT shareable. >> We create struct nand_bbt to take place of nand_chip in nand_bbt.c. >> Struct nand_bbt contains all the information BBT needed from outside and >> it should be embedded into NAND family chip struct (such as struct >> nand_chip). >> >> Below is mtd folder structure we want: >> drivers/mtd/nand/<all-nand-core-code> >> drivers/mtd/nand/raw/<raw-nand-controller-drivers> >> drivers/mtd/nand/spi/<spi-nand-code> >> drivers/mtd/nand/onenand/<onenand-code> >> drivers/mtd/nand/chips/<manufacturer-spcific-code> > > Hm, we should have a chips directory under each interface type, because > vendor specific handling is dependent on the NAND interface. > Otherwise, yes, that's the idea.
Update this in v4 Thanks, Peter Pan
