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 154o8B-0006vP-00 for ; Tue, 29 May 2001 19:22:11 +0100 From: David Woodhouse In-Reply-To: References: To: Frederic Giasson Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: Found a potential bug in MTD Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 19:26:22 +0100 Message-ID: <26652.991160782@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: fgiasson@mediatrix.com said: > > I compiled and tested the change with my board, and it works OK. It > also make sense since CFI_DEVICETYPE_X8 is an hardcoded value for 8 > bits type devices, and cfi->device_type holds the buswidth specified > in xconfig. The addr_unlock values set in cfi_probe_chip() are supposed to compensate for that. We can't do it by shifting by the device_type, because sometimes we need to put an odd address value on the bus for 16-bit chips. But the actual _detection_ of CFI chips shouldn't be affected by that anyway, unless it's falling back to the JEDEC probe. -- dwmw2