From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from majordomo by infradead.org with local (Exim 3.16 #2) id 13wmLc-0003kF-00 for mtd-list@infradead.org; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 14:18:36 +0000 Received: from cerebus-ext.cygnus.co.uk ([194.130.39.252] helo=passion.cygnus) by infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #2) id 13wmLb-0003k9-00 for mtd@infradead.org; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 14:18:35 +0000 From: David Woodhouse In-Reply-To: <004601c0509e$b10d5630$e3e8b2c6@hawk> References: <004601c0509e$b10d5630$e3e8b2c6@hawk> <20001117005926.A829@portablue.linux-apollo.org> <3A14EFF6.EE574112@auriga.ru> To: "Mike Hill" Cc: mtd@infradead.org Subject: Re: MTD on intel 28F320B3 flash memory Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 14:18:02 +0000 Message-ID: <9558.974470682@redhat.com> Sender: owner-mtd@infradead.org List-ID: mhill@bustech.com said: > The 28F320B3 is a BOOT BLOCK flash part. It contains Eight 8K > regions and 63 64K regions. The CFI code assumes that all regions are > of the same size. I am currently using this part in a design. To get > around this problem, I changed the CFI code to treat the 8K regions as > a single 64K region. I think that's the correct way do do things. I don't think the MTD layer needs to handle variable erase sizes within a single MTD partition. Either your CFI driver registers a single device with 64K erasesize, or it registers two devices, one with 8K erasesize and the remainder with 64K erasesize. I can't think of any situation in which you'd want to _use_ the multiple erasesize without actually using the boot blocks for a separate purpose to the remainder of the flash, in which case they should be in different MTD devices anyway, as far as the MTD layer is concerned. -- dwmw2 To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe mtd" to majordomo@infradead.org