[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > The code does't skip coorectly the bad block, because it use > start_addr instead > of i in the if code in main loop (so the condition is always true). > Then it must check the first and second page, byte 5 of 16 extrabyte.
Yes, I see that there are three changes in your patch: - avoid false positives by only checking the beginning of a block - check the second page as well - do more wait_idle The first two fix pretty obvious bugs. I'm curious about the third: did you experience failures due to the lack of waiting here ? - Werner
