From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S267361AbUHSUVM (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Aug 2004 16:21:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S267365AbUHSUVM (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Aug 2004 16:21:12 -0400 Received: from server18.wavepath.com ([63.247.70.66]:11689 "EHLO server18.wavepath.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S267361AbUHSUUx (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Aug 2004 16:20:53 -0400 Message-ID: <15724.12.172.68.51.1092946691.squirrel@server18.wavepath.com> Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 16:18:11 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.4.27 - MTD cfi_cmdset_0002.c - Duplicate cleanup in error path From: To: In-Reply-To: <20040819155405.GC4396@logos.cnet> References: <200407231947.i6NJlwo32224@bradgoodman.com> <87k6wtlvwk.fsf@farside.sncag.com> <20040819155405.GC4396@logos.cnet> X-Priority: 3 Importance: Normal Cc: , , , X-Mailer: SquirrelMail (version 1.2.11) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org I noticed it in the 2.4.28-pre1 changelog. I had concidered doing it has he described - I figured though as a first-time submitter, the less I touched, the more comfortable people would feel with it ;-) Thanks, -BKG > > Applied Rainer's patch, its equivalent and I his > "consisteny with other algorithms" point is a good one. > > Thanks guys! > > On Sat, Jul 24, 2004 at 03:14:03PM +0800, Rainer Weikusat wrote: >> "bradgoodman.com" writes: >> > Patch to 2.4.x: Corrects an obvious error where all of the cleanups >> are done twice in the event of a chip programming error. This can >> result in kernel BUG() getting called on subsequent programming >> attempts. > >> That way, it is consistent with the other low-level chip access >> functions. But the algorithm is per se buggy, anyway, because except >> if DQ5 was raised before, the chip is not 'ready' (for reading array >> data), but still in programming mode and will remain there until the >> 'embedded programming algorithm' stops, because (according to the >> docs) a reset command will not be accepted until DQ5 has been raised >> and the opportunityto check for that is gone after the syscall >> returned to the caller.