From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from majordomo by infradead.org with local (Exim 3.20 #2) id 14bNCC-0007yq-00 for mtd-list@infradead.org; Fri, 09 Mar 2001 13:44:40 +0000 Received: from dell-paw-3.cambridge.redhat.com ([195.224.55.237] helo=passion.cambridge.redhat.com) by infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #2) id 14bNCA-0007yk-00 for mtd@infradead.org; Fri, 09 Mar 2001 13:44:39 +0000 From: David Woodhouse In-Reply-To: References: To: =?iso-8859-1?B?S+FyaSBEYXbt8HNzb24=?= Cc: mtd@infradead.org Subject: Re: Abstractation Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 13:44:28 +0000 Message-ID: <11524.984145468@redhat.com> Sender: owner-mtd@infradead.org List-ID: kd@flaga.is said: > I need to add a cfi_cmdset_0003 to support a Intel chip that we have > in our boards. You'll probably find it works if you just hack cfi_probe to invoke cfi_cmdset_0001 instead. See the list archives - this came up quite recently. > Why does I as the cmdset writer have to know all this stuff about the > buswith, number of chips etc? You need to handle multiple chips interleaved on a wide bus anyway. Numchips isn't too difficult and by doing it at the command set level we eliminate the need for external wrapper functions which make multiple calls to the single-chip version of the access function. -- dwmw2 To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe mtd" to majordomo@infradead.org