On Monday 06 July 2009 04:47:41 Stefan Roese wrote:
On Monday 06 July 2009 10:37:10 Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Monday 06 July 2009 03:25:43 Stefan Roese wrote:
On Monday 06 July 2009 09:04:44 Mike Frysinger wrote:
we would want to avoid ambiguity -- is "nor" referring to the nor flashes or is it referring to a partition named "nor".
The first version would refer "nor" as flash type and the 2nd one "nor0" as a device name from mtdparts/mtdids.
so people wouldnt be able to name a mtdpart "nor"
Yes, this doesn't make much sense. It's probably better to only use the 2nd approach via the mtdparts/mtdids name.
when mtdparts support is enabled, sure. the logic could be fairly dynamic -- if you give it two args, it is referring to a flash type and a flash #. if you give it one, it defaults to mtdparts if it's enabled. if no mtdpart exists named that way, it falls back to flash type and flash 0. -mike