All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Brendan Simon <BrendanSimon@fastmail.fm>
To: Dan Brown <dan_brown@ieee.org>
Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: 128MB DOC2000 with 2.4.X kernel
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 15:27:11 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <411AFFAF.5030908@fastmail.fm> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <032f01c47fa1$ae533f50$0100a8c0@superfortress>

Dan Brown wrote:

>>    3) Recommend using 2.6 kernel and latest MTD tree.
>>    
>>
>This would still be my recommendation, however, there has been some effort
>in the last few days to allow the latest MTD code to compile under the 2.4
>series.  If you're dead-set against switching to 2.6, it might be worth your
>time to grab the latest MTD snapshot, patch your 2.4 kernel using the
>included script, and see what happens.  No promises.
>  
>
Depends whether it would patch to 2.4.18 sucessfully or whether it is 
designed to patch to 2.4.26 or 2.4.27.  If I have to do work to get it 
to patch, then the time might be better spent porting 2.6.x to my board :)

>>Is the 96MB DOC2000 more like the 64MB model or the 128MB model?
>>i.e. can I use a 96MB DOC2000 with my existing 2.4.18 kernel or will I
>>have the same problems as the 128MB DOC.
>>    
>>
>INFTL [Inverse NAND Flash Translation Layer] M-Systems' latest flash
>management algorithm, used by the TrueFFS driver for the following devices:
>
>- DiskOnChip Millennium Plus
>- Mobile DiskOnChip Plus
>- DiskOnChip 2000 DIP (high), 384Mbytes and higher.
>- DiskOnChip 2000 DIP (low), 192Mbytes and higher.
>
>If I had reviewed this table before I responded to your email, I would have
>noticed that the 128M DOC ought to use NFTL.  Are you sure you have a part
>that "looks like a Millennium"?  (All DOC2000 parts that use the Millennium
>hardware interface also use INFTL, and vice versa.)  I'm willing to believe
>the MSYS docs I have might be out of date (I'm pretty sure the
>low-profile/high-profile boundary has changed), but it would be good to
>confirm this.
>  
>
I can confirm that the 128MB DOC I received in Australia definately DOES 
NOT work.  i.e. it looks like it has the new ASIC embedded in it.  A 
friend of mine in the USA also sees the same thing on his newly received 
128MB DOC.  Therefore I think the M-System docs are wrong.

Anyone know about the 96MB DOC2000 ????
Is it an old style or new style DOC2000 ????

Cheers,
Brendan Simon.

  reply	other threads:[~2004-08-12  5:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-08-05  3:51 128MB DOC2000 with 2.4.X kernel Brendan J Simon
2004-08-05 12:55 ` Dan Brown
2004-08-11  1:11   ` Brendan Simon
2004-08-11 12:49     ` Dan Brown
2004-08-12  5:27       ` Brendan Simon [this message]
2004-09-09  3:16         ` 96MB/128MB " Brendan Simon
2004-09-09 22:44           ` Kurt A. Freiberger

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=411AFFAF.5030908@fastmail.fm \
    --to=brendansimon@fastmail.fm \
    --cc=dan_brown@ieee.org \
    --cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.