From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from h139-142-224-7.gtcust.grouptelecom.net ([139.142.224.7]) by pentafluge.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 16tXcR-0007Qo-00 for ; Fri, 05 Apr 2002 18:35:23 +0100 Received: from athlon (24-66-30-3.gatewest-shaw.ca [24.66.30.3]) by kynes.gatewest.net (8.12.1/8.12.0.Beta19/Debian 8.12.0.Beta19) with SMTP id g35HZKdu014595 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2002 11:35:20 -0600 Message-ID: <003f01c1dcc8$431f76f0$87657bc8@athlon> From: "Derek Ross" To: Subject: Adding a non-blocking erase func Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 11:35:21 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-mtd-admin@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: linux-mtd-admin@lists.infradead.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Hello, Say I wanted to write another erase function that's ioctl callable. This function would be non-blocking. Would it be good to: 1. add another define "MEMERASE_NDELAY," 2. Go into the function mtd_ioctl, and add a case for MEMERASE_NDELAY. 3. The case for MEMERASE_NDELAY would be a copy of MEMERASE except with the wait_queue stuff taken out. Would this be a simple task (in your opinion) or would that be one of those things that would be tricky to debug and get working? Thanks, Derek.