On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 4:24 PM, Scott Wood <scottw...@freescale.com> wrote: > On Fri, 27 Aug 2010 23:59:13 -0400 > Ben Gardiner <bengardi...@nanometrics.ca> wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 5:59 PM, Scott Wood <scottw...@freescale.com> wrote: >> > On 08/27/2010 04:46 PM, Scott Wood wrote: >> >> For now, I guess don't worry about sharing the code. >> > >> > Plus, I've got some changes to the NAND command/util code I'm about to send >> > out that touch this -- if sharing is going to be a pain, I can go back to >> > the version that only passes back "fits with bad blocks", "fits with no bad >> > blocks", or "doesn't fit", and doesn't deal with 64-bit sizes because it's >> > only used by read/write which is limited by pointer size. That simpler >> > version is 128 bytes smaller in my build. >> >> I imagine you don't have to go back. > > I already did; it's smaller and slightly simpler for what it currently > needs to do. It would still be easy to switch to using the MTD > function later.
Ok, no problem. If you're interested in taking this series through the nand-testing tree I would be happy to rebase this series and integrate with your MTD changes. Best Regards, Ben Gardiner --- Nanometrics Inc. http://www.nanometrics.ca _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
