Problems with cfi_cmdset_0002.c
dwmw2 at infradead.org
Thu Feb 15 06:10:47 EST 2001
jonas.holmberg at axis.com said:
> I cannot find any info on relationship between CFI version numbers
> and bootloc. I looked through the CFI 1.0 and 1.1 spec, but found
> nothing. Does anybody know?
Only AMD. My datasheet for the AM29LV320D says the vendor-specific extended
query table version is 1.1 and includes bootloc (AMD pub #23579 Rev A, p23).
If the datasheets for other chips say v1.0 and omit bootloc, then that's
good enough, isn't it?
> Otherwise my suggestion is still "if (!bootloc)" until proven wrong. I
> think it's safer than "cfi_version < 1.1". What do you think?
That means you're depending on the contents of a byte which is not defined.
If it's off the end of the v1.0 table, it doesn't have to be zero in all
cases. It's theoretically safer to look for the version number first, and
only read bootloc if it's at least v1.1.
But I don't care enough to argue :) As long as it works, it's OK by me.
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe mtd" to majordomo at infradead.org
More information about the linux-mtd