[PATCH 1/1] UBI

[Artem B. Bityutskiy]

Hello Josh,

On Wed, 2006-07-05 at 06:36 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> Does the range for bad eraseblock reserve really need to be up to 1/2
> the device?
Probably no, which digit would you conceive?

> Perhaps all the MTD_UBI_DEBUG options could be hidden in a seperate
> Kconfig file that is sourced.  As it stands now, it's fairly bloated
> for a large majority of options that won't get enabled.
Well, may be. I am not confused by them, actually, but I have nothing
against moving them to a separate file - why not?

> Why all the forward declarations of structures in the various header
> files?  Couldn't this be done by properly including the header files
> that are needed?
Well, I deliberately used forward declaration as it is faster then
including headers just for the sake of getting some structure defined.

Why is it bad? Please, refer a particular example.

> This is a short list at the moment.  I need to find some more time to
> dig into the patch.
It would be hunky dory :-)

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem B. Bityutskiy,
St.-Petersburg, Russia.