[PATCH] Adding eraseblock header support(revised version)

[Artem B. Bityutskiy]

zhao forrest wrote:
>> It is supposed that you eliminated cleanmarkers completely, right?
>> Why then I still see functions like jffs2_check_nand_cleanmarker()?
> 
> We'll allow mount old JFFS2 image if it used 1:1 mapping. So
> during mount scan we need to scan both cleanmarker and eraseblock
> header. So I don't change the name. Maybe a new name like
> jffs2_check_nand_cleanmarker_ebh() is better.
> 
Ah, pardon... Then OK, IMO, no need to rename.

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