On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 11:09 PM, Fathi Boudra fboudra@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I really would rather not duplicate all of this, which looks extremely similar to regular NAND. Is there reason why we don't use the mtd_info function pointer interface?
Agreed, It's almost same as NAND code. Now nand code uses two modes, legacy and mtd. Because I don't want to break the NAND code , I used the duplicated code. Basically it should be used the common mtd style code except legacy.
So first it added the current code, next time it tries to use the common interface and some code clean up.
As it is right now, you can't have jffs2 command support on both NAND and OneNAND. Dunno if you could have this case (both NAND and OneNAND enabled) but it will fail to build: In file included from /u-boot-1.3.3/include/linux/mtd/onenand.h:21, from jffs2_1pass.c:279: /u-boot-1.3.3/include/linux/mtd/bbm.h:49: error: redefinition of 'struct nand_bbt_descr' In file included from jffs2_1pass.c:279: /u-boot-1.3.3/include/linux/mtd/onenand.h:36: error: redeclaration of enumerator 'FL_READY' /u-boot-1.3.3/include/linux/mtd/nand.h:212: error: previous definition of 'FL_READY' was here /u-boot-1.3.3/include/linux/mtd/onenand.h:37: error: redeclaration of enumerator 'FL_READING' /u-boot-1.3.3/include/linux/mtd/nand.h:213: error: previous definition of 'FL_READING' was here /u-boot-1.3.3/include/linux/mtd/onenand.h:38: error: redeclaration of enumerator 'FL_WRITING' /u-boot-1.3.3/include/linux/mtd/nand.h:214: error: previous definition of 'FL_WRITING' was here /u-boot-1.3.3/include/linux/mtd/onenand.h:39: error: redeclaration of enumerator 'FL_ERASING' /u-boot-1.3.3/include/linux/mtd/nand.h:215: error: previous definition of 'FL_ERASING' was here /u-boot-1.3.3/include/linux/mtd/onenand.h:40: error: redeclaration of enumerator 'FL_SYNCING' /u-boot-1.3.3/include/linux/mtd/nand.h:216: error: previous definition of 'FL_SYNCING' was here jffs2_1pass.c: In function 'put_fl_mem': jffs2_1pass.c:466: error: redefinition of 'id' jffs2_1pass.c:459: error: previous definition of 'id' was here make[1]: *** [jffs2_1pass.o] Error 1
Yes, you're right. it's complicit. However it's not related with this patch. It happens always at current source. Next time it will fix it.
Thank you, Kyungmin Park