On 03/06/2013 08:56:56 AM, htbegin wrote:
Hi, Scott
Thanks for your review.
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Scott Wood scottwood@freescale.com wrote:
On 03/02/2013 03:01:10 AM, Tao Hou wrote:
When the data has been partially written into the NAND Flash, returning the written length instead of 0. The written length may be useful when the upper level decides to continue the writing after skipping the block causing the write failure.
We already do that in some code paths.
Signed-off-by: Tao Hou hotforest@gmail.com Cc: Scott Wood scottwood@freescale.com Cc: Ben Gardiner bengardiner@nanometrics.ca Cc: Lei Wen leiwen@marvell.com
drivers/mtd/nand/nand_util.c | 22 +++++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
Could you rebase this on top of this patch: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/224842/
Do you mean a V2 patch ?
Yes.
BTW, are you actually using WITH_YAFFS_OOB? I think there are some
other
things wrong with it at the moment, as mentioned here: http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2013-March/148378.html
No, I don't use it.
Changes to that code should be tested by someone...
if (rval != 0) { printf("NAND write to offset %llx failed%d\n",
offset, rval);
*length -= left_to_write;
*length -= left_to_write - written_size; return rval; }...but I don't see why this part is needed (or correct). Why
doesn't
"*length -= left_to_write" already get you what you want?
-Scott
I just use "*length -= left_to_write - written_size" to tell the upper level that what had been actually happened. For the current block, "written_size" has been written to the NAND Flash yet, so left_to_write should be subtracted by "written_size".
But left_to_write isn't decreased until after this error return, so that's already the case. Subtracting written_size from left_to_write has the effect of increasing length by written_size, so the return value will now look like the error page has been written.
-Scott