Usage of MTD_UADDR_UNNECESSARY broken?

[Ben Dooks]

On Mon, Nov 08, 2004 at 12:54:16PM +0100, Alexander Hoffmann wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> can anybody please explain me the exact difference between 
> MTD_UADDR_DONT_CARE and MTD_UADDR_UNNECESSARY .
> Because if I use MTD_UADDR_UNNECESSARY an not existing field in the 
> unlock_addrs array is beeing referenced
> (/drivers/mtd/chips/jedec_probe.c, function cfi_jedec_setup, line 1740):
> 
> /* Mask out address bits which are smaller than the device type */
> mask = ~(p_cfi->device_type-1);
> p_cfi->addr_unlock1 = unlock_addrs[uaddr].addr1 & mask;
> p_cfi->addr_unlock2 = unlock_addrs[uaddr].addr2 & mask;

hmm, thought this masking had been eliminated in later copies of
the mtd code?

-- 
Ben (ben at fluff.org, http://www.fluff.org/)

  'a smiley only costs 4 bytes'