On 30.12.2007 13:15, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote: > On 30.12.2007 05:40, Corey Osgood wrote: > >> doesn't seem quite right, but it might be (yes, I realize it means 4x >> more IDs). We also break the ability to use IMT flash chips (which >> someone may, eventually...). The other things is, if it should be a >> while loop, why isn't it? >> > > Oh, I had not seen the IMT entry in flash.h. It is obviously wrong. With > the current code, at least EON and IMT will collide, and neither have a > real vendor ID of 0x7f. I'll dig out the real IMT vendor ID. >
Patch to fix the IMT entry sent to the list. I hope this addresses your concerns. Regards, Carl-Daniel -- linuxbios mailing list linuxbios@linuxbios.org http://www.linuxbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
