From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from osdsun1.nrl.navy.mil ([132.250.130.7]) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1D7Cww-0001VG-GD for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 04 Mar 2005 08:34:39 -0500 Message-ID: <422863D9.6010109@ieee.org> Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 08:34:17 -0500 From: Dan Brown MIME-Version: 1.0 To: andrew box References: <66f646fd05030323395ed3a52c@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <66f646fd05030323395ed3a52c@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: differences between NFTL and INFTL List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , andrew box wrote: > I have a diskonchip2000dip(NFTL) with jffs2,and I want to use it as a > boot device,while docboot just support INFTL now...that is the reason > why I want to know the difference between them. The DOC2000 parts that use INFTL have a different controller chip (derived from the one used in the DOC Millennium, rather than the one in the original NFTL-based DOC2000). The register locations, command sequences, etc. are all slightly different. Also, the boot loader in the NFTL-based parts' ROM does things a bit differently from the way it works on the INFTL parts. Having said all that, the differences are well understood and would only affect small portions of docboot. The task of porting docboot to the NFTL-based parts should not be large. All we need is a volunteer :) -Dan