Numonyx NOR and chip->mutex bug?
joakim.tjernlund at transmode.se
Thu Feb 3 09:01:15 EST 2011
Michael Cashwell <mboards at prograde.net> wrote on 2011/02/03 14:24:53:
> On Feb 3, 2011, at 3:11 AM, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > Michael Cashwell <mboards at prograde.net> wrote on 2011/02/02 22:19:58:
> >> Note, the SR[7,2] bits its says are cleared by the command are not the error bits we're talking about. 7 and 2 are WSM-ready and erase-complete. The error bits are different ones. Maybe that's the confusion?
> > Yeah, didn't read this thoroughly enough, the comment talks about the status bits though. Seems like the safe thing to do even though I don't recall anyone running into this problem before.
> Agreed. I expect it would only matter if the intervening operation (likely a buffered write) itself both failed and left its own error bits in the register. For all I know that can't happen because the status clear is done as part of handling those errors.
> > Send it as a separate git patch though.
> Is this a nudge to separate the patches (eg: don't do unrelated things in one patch), or are you saying the patch format must be based on a git tree? I must admit lameness regarding using git as it was not part of the workflow I inherited.
Both actually. I guess the patch doesn't doesn't have to be formatted with git but it
needs to follow some rules, see Documentation/SubmittingPatches
Please hit enter every now and then :)
More information about the linux-mtd