Hi Michael,
Thanks for the review!
On 12/20/25 09:39, Michael Nazzareno Trimarchi wrote:
diff --git a/cmd/mtd.c b/cmd/mtd.c
index 7f25144098b..1d1845bce44 100644
--- a/cmd/mtd.c
+++ b/cmd/mtd.c
@@ -559,8 +559,10 @@ static int do_mtd_io(struct cmd_tbl *cmdtp, int flag, int
argc,
/* Search for the first good block after the given offset */
off = start_off;
- while (mtd_block_isbad(mtd, off))
+ while (mtd_block_isbad(mtd, off)) {
+ printf("Bad block: failed to read at offset 0x%llx,
skipping.\n", off);
off += mtd->erasesize;
+ }
Would like to avoid adding more debug stuff or printing here.
Sure, I'll send it as a separate patch in V2 with the other debug
commit, then upstream can decide if it's worth taking or not.
+ remaining = 0;
+ ret = CMD_RET_SUCCESS;
What is the drawback to failing here, I mean you can still verify the
integrity. GIve a script example
where this is needed in the commit message
This behavior is similar to the raw `nand` command which adjusts the
size of the read with adjust_size_for_badblocks().
It is explained in the cover letter.
+ break;
+ }
+
/* Skip the block if it is bad */
if (mtd_is_aligned_with_block_size(mtd, off) &&
mtd_block_isbad(mtd, off)) {
+ printf("Bad block: failed to read at offset 0x%llx,
skipping.\n", off);
off += mtd->erasesize;
This is an extra print for now, you can propose it on a separated patch
I'll send it as a separate patch with the other debug commit.
Best regards,
Peter
