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 16fOoc-0003X5-00 for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2002 17:21:30 +0000 From: David Woodhouse In-Reply-To: References: To: Robert Kaiser Cc: Adam Wozniak , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, Jonas Holmberg Subject: Re: Re-entrancy of flash erase/write Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 17:32:46 +0000 Message-ID: <26609.1014658366@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: rob@sysgo.de said: > What mechanism is there to avoid writes during erase suspend ? I have > seen the problem in situations where the JFFS2 GC thread was erasing > while another process (tar in my case) was writing to a *different > partition* in the same chip. (Maybe that is a hint ?) Introducing the > set_vpp counter reliably solved this. All the partition code does is add an offset and call into the original underlying flash driver. So it just looks like two concurrent calls to the one driver, and the state machine ought to deal with that correctly. -- dwmw2