From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([2001:6f8:1178:4:290:27ff:fe1d:cc33]) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.76 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1R9Dqy-0008J5-2g for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 10:28:42 +0000 Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 12:28:29 +0200 From: Sascha Hauer Message-ID: <20110929102829.GG31404@pengutronix.de> References: <560194a56016e7562eb1e50f68a58ff6f6e069a7.1316086518.git.fercerpav@gmail.com> <20110920193121.GA31404@pengutronix.de> <20110920202901.GS3579@home.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110920202901.GS3579@home.lan> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: barebox-bounces@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] m25p80: add additional sanity checks for erasure To: Paul Fertser Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org, Franck JULLIEN Hi Paul, Sorry for the delay. On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 12:29:01AM +0400, Paul Fertser wrote: > On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 09:31:21PM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 03:27:36PM +0400, Paul Fertser wrote: > > > This guards for the cases where the initial offset or byte count is > > > not aligned with regard to erase block size, thus making it impossible > > > for erase to do any harm to the nearby sectors. > > > > I'm unsure about this one. The other flash drivers allow to erase areas > > which are not eraseblock aligned. Maybe we should instead add a > > cdev->erasesize field. Then we can add this check in the generic code > > and fix this for all drivers. > > I guess i was too surprised by seeing an endless loop when i tried to > erase an area of the wrong size (the counter underflowed) to think > about it in a less narrow-minded way, sorry, you're right of course. > > Talking about generalisation, shouldn't the m25p80 driver be hooked > into the mtd subsystem to allow running ubi on top of it? By the > cursory look it seems to be doable without much effort. Yes, it probably should. The cfi driver also is not a mtd driver but has some mtd glue code. Maybe the same approach (even better the same code) can be used here. > > Another question: should i repost this early (questionable) series you > seem to have missed[1]? > > [1] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/barebox/2011-August/004483.html Not necessary, I just applied it. Thanks Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox