Abhishek, Miquel Raynal <[email protected]> wrote on Wed, 18 Jul 2018 23:41:44 +0200:
> Hi Boris, > > Boris Brezillon <[email protected]> wrote on Wed, 18 Jul 2018 > 23:36:37 +0200: > > > On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 23:15:26 +0200 > > Miquel Raynal <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hi Abhishek, > > > > > > Abhishek Sahu <[email protected]> wrote on Fri, 6 Jul 2018 > > > 13:21:58 +0530: > > > > > > > Remove the NAND_SKIP_BBTSCAN to use RAM based BBT. > > > > > > Unless I am understanding it the wrong way, NAND_SKIP_BBTSCAN will skip > > > the scan of the on-chip BBT and will scan every block to construct a > > > RAM, based BBT thanks to the BBM. > > > > > > So flash based BBT is already unused and removing this flag is a > > > mistake, right? > > > > ->scan_bbt() is also taking care of building the in-RAM BBT based on > > BBM when no on-flash BBT is provided, so I think it's the right thing > > to do. > > Oh right. Then doing so is harmless. Could you please update the commit log to reflect this aspect? > > Thanks for the clarification. > Miquèl
