Re: LOCK and UNLOCK functions

[Alice Hennessy <ahennessy@mvista.com>]

Alice Hennessy wrote:

> David Woodhouse wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 11 Jan 2001, Alice Hennessy wrote:
> >
> > > 1. It doesn't appear to me that suspend affects the locking and
> > > unlocking flowcharts - only program and erase.  Is this a correct
> > > assumption?
> >
> > What do you mean? Suspend affects everything, because we're about to turn
> > off the chip (the oldstate stuff is a thinko). If we're in the middle of
> > telling the chip to lock/unlock then suspend has return failure till we're
> > finished.
>
> I was referring to the "Block Erase, Program Suspend" command in the STRATA
> spec
> and was wondering  if I need to add checking for  FL_LOCKING  in
> do_read_onechip() as we do for
> FL_ERASING.   Should have been more specific :)
> BTW: what does "thinko" mean?

After thinking about it  :) this was a pointless  question since locking
doesn't have the time issue
that erase does and there is no good reason to interrupt it for read.

Alice

>
>
> >
> >
> > > 2. The mtdchar.c ioctl call for MEMUNLOCK passes the start and len
> > > addresses.  The unlock for the STRATA clears all the lock bits.  So I
> > > intend to include logic to reinstate the locked bits that are outside
> > > the desired range.  Sound reasonable?
> >
> > Hmmm. Better to design the API better so it can describe the capabilities
> > of the chip. You don't have to stick to what I threw together - I'm full
> > of crap half the time. Hadn't you realised that yet?
>
> Then my choice would be to keep it simple and let userland keep track of
> what lock bits it has set in the past.
>
> Alice
>
> >
> >
> > --
> > dwmw2



To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe mtd" to majordomo@infradead.org