From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from hermes.chez-thomas.org ([63.225.98.241]) by pentafluge.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.22 #5 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1AMq6a-0007bU-Mn for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 14:48:24 +0000 From: Gary Thomas To: ghannon@cspi.com In-Reply-To: <85256DE4.004F812B.00@pine.cspi.com> References: <85256DE4.004F812B.00@pine.cspi.com> Message-Id: <1069339584.1961.654.camel@hermes> Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: 20 Nov 2003 07:46:24 -0700 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: MTD and Intel rev J Strata Flash List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, 2003-11-20 at 07:36, ghannon@cspi.com wrote: > Hi, > > I'm assuming the linux-mtd list has long since vanished. Not that I'm aware of - I've copied this to that list. > > I'm working with a rev J strata flash part. > > It has the "feature" that it's lock-bits can be set individually, > but are cleared colllectively. I have made a 3 partition system > where I mainly want two partitions locked except when I am updating > them, and the third one unlocked always. > > Has any effort been put into the MTD layer to take into account that > an unlock clears all the bits and some should be put back on. > I didn't see anything like that in the code. > > I will put the functionality into my tools if it is not in a lower layer > already. > > Thanks, > > Gary Hannon > CSPI > > > ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/ -- Gary Thomas MLB Associates