On Mon, Aug 09, 2010 at 04:43:59PM -0400, Ben Gardiner wrote:
> +static void spread_partition(struct mtd_info *mtd, struct part_info *part,
> + u32 *next_offset)
As in patch 2, change u32 to uint64_t.
> +{
> + if (!mtd->block_isbad)
> + goto out;
> +
> + u32 i, bb_delta = 0;
> +
> + for (i = part->offset; i - bb_delta < part->offset + part->size;
> + i += mtd->erasesize) {
> + if (mtd->block_isbad(mtd, i))
> + bb_delta += mtd->erasesize;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * Absorb bad blocks immeadiately following this
> + * partition also into the partition, such that
> + * the next partition starts with a good block.
> + */
> + while (i < mtd->size && mtd->block_isbad(mtd, i)) {
> + bb_delta += mtd->erasesize;
> + i += mtd->erasesize;
> + }
Could this be refactored with get_len_incl_bad()? It should return both the
updated length and a flag indicating whether it was truncated.
> + debug("spread_partitions: device = %s%d, partition %d ="
> + " (%s) 0x%...@0x%08x\n",
> + MTD_DEV_TYPE(dev->id->type), dev->id->num,
> + part_num, part->name, part->size,
> + part->offset);
Why the extra indent on that last line?
IMHO, it's also nicer to line up continuation lines like this:
debug("spread_partitions..."
" (%s) ..."
MTD_DEV...
part_num...
part->offset);
-Scott
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
