From: Scott Wood Date: Fri, 1 May 2015 22:41:44 -0500 Subject: [U-Boot] [U-Boot, 02/10] arm: s3c24xx: Fix incorrect CONFIG_SYS_S3C2410_NAND_HWECC name In-Reply-To: <201505020318.26791.marex@denx.de> References: <1413045778-5690-2-git-send-email-marex@denx.de> <201505020246.05889.marex@denx.de> <1430529101.16357.211.camel@freescale.com> <201505020318.26791.marex@denx.de> Message-ID: <1430538104.16357.222.camel@freescale.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Sat, 2015-05-02 at 03:18 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: > On Saturday, May 02, 2015 at 03:11:41 AM, Scott Wood wrote: > > On Sat, 2015-05-02 at 02:46 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: > > > On Thursday, November 27, 2014 at 03:03:50 AM, Scott Wood wrote: > > > > On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 06:42:50PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: > > > > > The correct name of this symbol is CONFIG_S3C2410_NAND_HWECC , the > > > > > _SYS is redundant. > > > > > > > > What makes that the correct name? The symbol is not documented > > > > anywhere, and while nothing currently tests for the SYS version, > > > > nothing currently sets the non-SYS version. > > > > > > > > What is SYS redundant with? > > > > > > > > Is this meant to be a user config knob or something that is fixed for a > > > > given board? > > > > > > u-boot$ git grep CONFIG_SYS_S3C2410_NAND_HWECC > > > include/configs/VCMA9.h:#define CONFIG_SYS_S3C2410_NAND_HWECC > > > include/configs/smdk2410.h:#define CONFIG_SYS_S3C2410_NAND_HWECC > > > > > > u-boot$ git grep CONFIG_S3C2410_NAND_HWECC > > > drivers/mtd/nand/s3c2410_nand.c:#ifdef CONFIG_S3C2410_NAND_HWECC > > > drivers/mtd/nand/s3c2410_nand.c:#ifdef CONFIG_S3C2410_NAND_HWECC > > > > > > The driver checks the version without _SYS. This is a clear bugfix, > > > so please apply. > > > > There's a clear bug. I asked questions to determine whether this is the > > proper fix (and encourage a better changelog), and you still haven't > > answered. It would also be nice if you'd document the symbol while > > you're at it. > > Adding new stuff (like documentation) is now mandatory part of bugfix ? I didn't say mandatory. I said "would be nice". > I'd expect bugfixes to be taken in to actually fix bugs and not kept out > of the tree because the submitter didn't also do another random chore. In this case the lack of documentation feels related to the cause of the bug -- no authoritative place to say what the proper name is. I don't see it as "another random chore". > Also, I do not know what else should I say besides that the symbol name > is incorrect and you can clearly see it. If that is not enough ... The names don't match. That's a bug. I was wondering whether the right thing was to remove SYS in one place or add it in the other (or have we given up on maintaining the distinction?). I didn't expect asking that question to be a huge burden on the patch's progress. It was also bundled up in a patchset with a bunch of non-bugfixes, so it didn't seem like you were asking for urgent handling of this one. > > In any case, I don't know why you're asking me to apply a patch with an > > "arm:" subject line, which only touches ARM board config files, instead > > of asking an ARM custodian. > > You were the only one who responded, And look at what I get for doing so. :-) > but I'm fine if Tom or whoever picks this. While I would have liked an answer to the questions I asked, it's not worth arguing over, so: Acked-by: Scott Wood -Scott