Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote: > 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
In that case: Acked-by: Corey Osgood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- linuxbios mailing list linuxbios@linuxbios.org http://www.linuxbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
