From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from dell-paw-3.cambridge.redhat.com ([195.224.55.237] helo=passion.cambridge.redhat.com) by pentafluge.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 16AvGj-00088H-00 for ; Mon, 03 Dec 2001 15:44:33 +0000 From: David Woodhouse In-Reply-To: References: To: Aleksander Sanochkin Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, jffs-dev@axis.com Subject: Re: JFFS1/MTD bug-fixes Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 15:55:01 +0000 Message-ID: <11102.1007394901@redhat.com> 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: asanochkin@Lnxw.COM said: > > 1) To be consistent with cfi_cmdset_002.c which always initializes > eraseregions. > 2) We have also modified JFFS1 code so as it now works for flash > partitions with non-uniform sectors, and our code is based on > the assumption that eraseregions are always initialized. If possible, I would prefer to keep the individual listing of erase regions optional for the common case where it's not necessary - how difficult would it be to make the JFFS1 code deal with that? > We have also added a possibility for run-time partitioning of an MTD > device, and use this usage_counter to prevent deleting of a partition > while it is being used by some process. In that context, I agree that it makes sense. Have you seen Jörn Engel's rewrite of the partitioning code, which I was intending to look at merging in 2.5? It would be useful to make that does what you require before we merge it. -- dwmw2