On Fri, 2006-09-15 at 09:56 +0200, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
> Probably. I'll give it a try.
>
> I have to find a way to unlock the flash at some point, though. Is it
> okay if I add code to physmap to iterate over the partitions and unlock
> the writable ones if info->mtd->unlock is non-null? Or is there a
> better way to do it?
I'm coming to the conclusion that if there are flash chips which inherit
the Intel insanity of automatically locking themselves on every power
cycle, thus rendering the 'locked' status meaningless, we should just
automatically unlock the whole chip at boot time, from the _chip_
driver.
That way, we can remove that hack from the board drivers which are
currently doing it.
> (btw, I got an "awaiting moderator approval" message from the linux-mtd
> mailer because "Message has a suspicious header". Can someone tell me
> more about this so I can fix my mailer?)
Attachments would do that, but your patches were sensibly inlined.
In fact, your mail got trapped for moderation because you did the
_right_ thing -- you sent them in a thread, with References: headers to
keep them together. But because that means you have References: and no
'Re:' in the Subject: header, that's indistinguishable from the muppets
who try to start a new thread by replying to an existing mail and
changing the subject. So it's trapped for moderation and I get to look
at it and manually approve it.
--
dwmw2
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
