From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pa0-x231.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c03::231]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1a03WZ-0000cS-Dx for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Sat, 21 Nov 2015 08:27:59 +0000 Received: by pacdm15 with SMTP id dm15so139895963pac.3 for ; Sat, 21 Nov 2015 00:27:38 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 00:27:27 -0800 From: Brian Norris To: Boris Brezillon Cc: Bean Huo =?utf-8?B?6ZyN5paM5paMIChiZWFuaHVvKQ==?= , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" Subject: Re: enhance ONFI table reliability/stable Message-ID: <20151121082727.GA3023@brian-ubuntu> References: <20151118025010.GB140057@google.com> <20151120235927.GD64635@google.com> <20151121084604.23fff6f9@bbrezillon> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151121084604.23fff6f9@bbrezillon> List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 08:46:04AM +0100, Boris Brezillon wrote: > This being said, I don't know how you would change the ONFI spec and > keep it compatible with the previous version. As I said, the current > version of the spec does not reserve any area after the mandatory > parameter pages... > You'll probably have to add a NAND_CMD_ALT_PARAM to support this kind > of thing. I was interpreting Bean's comments to mean only a change in software, not in the actual NAND flash (HW) implementation. If he is suggesting a change in the flash spec, then that's a completely different discussion. Brian