From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([131.228.20.172] helo=mgw-ext13.nokia.com) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.63 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1IAiET-0007LA-Uz for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 04:16:38 -0400 Subject: Re: UBI: Can we handle -EINTR differently in erase/write path??? From: Artem Bityutskiy To: Vinit Agnihotri In-Reply-To: <9b52d64c0707122307j419d2d98xa771c2c09a280164@mail.gmail.com> References: <9b52d64c0707122307j419d2d98xa771c2c09a280164@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 11:16:15 +0300 Message-Id: <1184660175.3531.130.camel@sauron> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Reply-To: dedekind@infradead.org List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 11:37 +0530, Vinit Agnihotri wrote: > Hi heres few code snip from erase_worker(); from wl.c > if (err !=3D -EIO) { > /* > * If this is not %-EIO, we have no idea what to do. Scheduling > * this physical eraseblock for erasure again would cause > * errors again and again. Well, lets switch to RO mode. > */ > ubi_ro_mode(ubi); > return err; > } Yeah, you are right, feel free to send a patch. The only thing I am curious about where, at what point the task can be interrupted? --=20 Best regards, Artem Bityutskiy (=D0=91=D0=B8=D1=82=D1=8E=D1=86=D0=BA=D0=B8=D0=B9 =D0=90= =D1=80=D1=82=D1=91=D0=BC)