7 Jun
2011
7 Jun
'11
6:34 p.m.
On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 09:09:07 -0400 Ben Gardiner bengardiner@nanometrics.ca wrote:
Why not call drop_ffs before this point?
To achieve the desired effect, drop_ffs must be called on each eraseblock sized chunk being written; so it seemed the simplest way was to force a block-by-block pass with the !WITH_DROP_FFS to enter
Ah, I missed that it was within each erase block.
In v4 I will add a -EINVAL if WITH_YAFFS_OOB flag is used with any other flag.
OK, I just didn't want it silently ignored, with no documentation of the limitation.
-Scott