From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 208.177.141.226.ptr.us.xo.net ([208.177.141.226] helo=ash.lnxi.com) by canuck.infradead.org with smtp (Exim 4.33 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1Bv9Yp-0004TW-AE for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:59:40 -0400 To: Andy Hawkins , D.A.Fedorov@inp.nsk.su, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, Thayne Harbaugh References: <1090856360.2220.63.camel@adh> <1090858047.2219.77.camel@adh> From: ebiederman@lnxi.com (Eric W. Biederman) Date: 12 Aug 2004 00:59:37 -0600 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: "Eric W. Biederman" Cc: Subject: Re: Problem writing to NOR flash List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , ebiederman@lnxi.com (Eric W. Biederman) writes: > Andy Hawkins writes: > > > If so, > > what is the *correct* way for this code to determine whether or not they > > are needed (this code is in a 'generic' file, so I'm surprised that > > there's chip specific information in there). > > > I have the first chunk done but I'm not ready to check it > in until I have a chance to test it. And I am swamped right now.. Well the changes wound up being a little more extensive than I described them. But the code in cfi_cmdset_0001 and cfi_cmdset_0002 should now be free of incorrect assumptions about what a flash chip can do. As for the correct way to do this it probably still needs a little more code review but there are fixup functions that are called when command sets are initialized that allow for weird cases to be special cased. Eric