On Thu, 2013-05-16 at 10:16 +0800, Huang Shijie wrote: > 于 2013年05月15日 20:11, Artem Bityutskiy 写道: > > On Wed, 2013-05-15 at 16:40 +0800, Huang Shijie wrote: > >> + * @ecc_strength: [INTERN] ECC correctability from the datasheet. > >> + * Minimum amount of bit errors per @ecc_step > >> guaranteed to > >> + * be correctable. If unknown, set to zero. > >> + * @ecc_step: [INTERN] ECC step required by the @ecc_strength, > >> + * also from the datasheet. It is the recommended > >> ECC step > >> + * size, if known; if unknown, set to zero. > > Here and in other places you talk about "datasheet". Do you assume that > > the real ECC strength/step used by NAND chips may be different? Or you > > assume it must be the same? > > > The two fields are used to store the ecc info from the datasheet. > The two fields are just for a reference. > > [1] The nand controller may do not use these two fields, it's ok; > For example, the datasheet requires "4bits per 512 bytes". > The nand controller can uses 8bits per 512 bytes. > > > [2] but sometimes the nand controller must use these two fields. > For example, the datasheet requires "40bits per 1024 bytes". > For the hardware limit, the nand controller(BCH) may supports the > 40bits ecc in the maximum. > So the nand controller must use these two fields now.
I wonder if it makes sense to name things so that it is clear form the names whether that is the "theoretical" datasheet values or the real ones. I would prefer to clearly distinguish between them, in names and comments. Thoughts? -- Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
