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 14vQpA-0001T3-00 for ; Thu, 03 May 2001 22:39:48 +0100 From: David Woodhouse In-Reply-To: References: <5116.988817985@redhat.com> To: ebiederman@lnxi.com (Eric W. Biederman) Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: Flash driver probe/commandset separation. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 22:40:13 +0100 Message-ID: <17287.988926013@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: ebiederman@lnxi.com said: > Note there is a good argument for joining the probe paths Handling > chip interleaving, unless we can make it simple we don't want that > duplicated many times. True. The build_cmd et al macros prevent duplication to a certain extent. > I'll try to have something working for 2 & 4 by the end of today. Any > hints on why the cmdset drivers don't compile? I changed the chip driver registration stuff. They need to have a struct mtd_chip_driver and set mtd->fldrv to point to it. And I'd like to make the inter_module_xxx stuff go away completely - maybe they can register with the code in chipreg instead, and get cfi_probe to look them up that way. That can wait a little while though - I'm not sure that's the correct approach (because they're not actually probes). -- dwmw2