On Tuesday 11 March 2008, David Gibson wrote: > On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 04:39:30AM +0100, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > > This isn't a problem with this device tree, but it's probably time we > > > started establishing some conventional generic names for nand flash > > > and board-control devices. > > > > > > So, to start the ball rolling, I've seen several names for nand flash > > > nodes, I'd suggest we standardise on "nand-flash". > > > > What's wrong with the already well-established generic name "flash"? > > I was concerned that using "flash" for both NOR flash (which it > already is) and NAND flash might be unwise. I am quite open to being > convinced otherwise, though.
One argument for just using "flash" is that there are much finer differences than just "NAND" and "NOR", with at least "dataflash", "OneNAND", "SD/MMC" being further types of flash that don't fit the categories exactly, though each one for different reasons. For SD/MMC, there are good reasons to use something completely different, for the others, calling them all "flash" sounds better than fitting them into "nand" and "nor". Arnd <>< _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev