On 05/09/2018 06:40 PM, Tudor Ambarus wrote: > > On 05/07/2018 08:14 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: >> But indeed there are -- to my knowledge -- no flashes with interleaved >> erase blocks. And yes, there could be improvement in erasing exactly the >> required chunk of flash with a fitting opcode:) > > Thanks Marek. > > Other improvement would be to minimize the amount of erase() calls by > using the best sequence of erase type commands depending on alignment. > But this will increase the number of queries. > > I've read again the Sector Map section of the JEDECB standard and it > looks like "overlaid" regions are possible. Here's an example that I > found there: > > Bottom: 8x 4KB sectors at bottom (only 4KB erase supported), > 1x overlaid 64KB sector at bottom (only 64KB erase supported), > 511 uniform 64KB sectors (only 64KB erase supported) > > That's interesting, when one wants to erase the overlaid 64KB sector, I > guess that the 8x 4KB sectors will be erased too.
Ah yes, some old flashes had these few 64 kiB erase blocks at the beginning/end, which could either be erased as one 64 kiB block or as smaller 8k/4k blocks . > I'm still studying this, I'll try to come with a proposal in the next > few days. Cool! -- Best regards, Marek Vasut
