From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from stone.tmok.com ([204.17.163.2] ident=pla) by pentafluge.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 15WNFj-0001JZ-00 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:19:55 +0100 Received: (from pla@localhost) by stone.tmok.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA19680 for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 15:25:47 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 15:25:47 -0400 (EDT) From: pla Message-Id: <200108131925.PAA19680@stone.tmok.com> To: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: DOC2000 erase size of 16k? 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: > Er, that code is older than the 20010807 snapshot you said you were using. > I meant the latest code from my CVS. I'm slightly concerned that the older > code works when the newer code doesn't - it's supposed to work the other > way round. Can you check the latest code and make sure it works there too? Hmm, yes, the 20010812 snapshot works correctly. I just diff'd the two snapshots, and would have to say that the problems I experienced did not result from anything in the MTD code, so don't trouble yourself with what went wrong. I must have accidentally whacked something without noticing. My apologies for wasting your time. > It doesn't work perfectly yet, although it shouldn't take much to fix it. > To make it fit, you have to use nftl_format to make the NFTL start further > in to the device. Ah! Now I see how this all fits together. Many thanks, and I will certainly write up my experiences for the HowTo. Incidentally, for anyone else trying this, it would serve them well to back up the bad blocks section of their DOC before doing *anything*. I seem to have killed my DOC by overwriting it, without a backup (fortunately, I can just get another from work, but not everyone has that luxury). - Ben