On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 4:24 PM, Scott Wood scottwood@freescale.com wrote:
On Fri, 27 Aug 2010 23:59:13 -0400 Ben Gardiner bengardiner@nanometrics.ca wrote:
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 5:59 PM, Scott Wood scottwood@freescale.com wrote:
On 08/27/2010 04:46 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
For now, I guess don't worry about sharing the code.
Plus, I've got some changes to the NAND command/util code I'm about to send out that touch this -- if sharing is going to be a pain, I can go back to the version that only passes back "fits with bad blocks", "fits with no bad blocks", or "doesn't fit", and doesn't deal with 64-bit sizes because it's only used by read/write which is limited by pointer size. That simpler version is 128 bytes smaller in my build.
I imagine you don't have to go back.
I already did; it's smaller and slightly simpler for what it currently needs to do. It would still be easy to switch to using the MTD function later.
Ok, no problem. If you're interested in taking this series through the nand-testing tree I would be happy to rebase this series and integrate with your MTD changes.
Best Regards, Ben Gardiner
--- Nanometrics Inc. http://www.nanometrics.ca