From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pv0-f177.google.com ([74.125.83.177]) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1P8ZGc-0000WT-Fl for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 14:03:47 +0000 Received: by pvg3 with SMTP id 3so776078pvg.36 for ; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 07:03:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4CBEF6BA.8080103@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 07:03:38 -0700 From: Brian Norris MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mike Frysinger Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mtd-utils: nanddump: add 64-bit support, utilize libmtd References: <1287557125-2672-1-git-send-email-computersforpeace@gmail.com> <1287557125-2672-2-git-send-email-computersforpeace@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Woodhouse , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, Artem Bityutskiy List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Mike, On 10/20/2010 12:01 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 02:45, Brian Norris wrote: >> ... >> -static unsigned long start_addr; // start address >> ... >> -static bool forcebinary = false; // force printing binary to tty ... >> +static unsigned long long start_addr; // start address ... >> +static bool forcebinary = false; // force printing binary to tty > > only one of these lines are functional. please fold the rest into > your "style fixup" patch. True, except that they are not "style fixups" until after start_addr has a longer data type (pun intended). I'll respin though. >> @@ -480,7 +479,7 @@ int main(int argc, char * const argv[]) >> if (noskipbad) >> continue; >> do { >> - if ((ret = ioctl(fd, MEMGETBADBLOCK, &offs)) < 0) { >> + if ((ret = 0 /*ioctl(fd, MEMGETBADBLOCK, &offs)*/) < 0) { >> perror("ioctl(MEMGETBADBLOCK)"); >> goto closeall; >> } > > doesnt seem to belong. then again, none of the changes to this file > look like they belong in this patch. Wow, I really thought I had fixed this. Sorry, I will definitely respin. I must have been in a hurry to send this out. Still, despite my inability/failure to fully proofread my patches, most of the patch *is* intentional and *does* belong, IMO. I will try to document it better in the next patch description, but do you have specifics on what you meant? Thanks, Brian