Re: [U-Boot-Users] Non-block-skipping NAND commands (was: Loading from NAND using 'nboot' Periodically Fails Where 'nand read' Succeeds)

Hi Scott, we are using the NAND stuff for a couple of boards. All use the .i or .jffs2 extension. So I also vote for making skipping the default. But the extensions should be preserved :-) Matthias On Tuesday 03 June 2008 00:07, Scott Wood wrote: Grant Erickson wrote: Thanks for the

Re: [U-Boot-Users] Non-block-skipping NAND commands (was: Loading from NAND using 'nboot' Periodically Fails Where 'nand read' Succeeds)

On Tuesday 03 June 2008, Scott Wood wrote: Grant Erickson wrote: Thanks for the suggestion. That solved it. As an academic exercise, is there any practical reason a system would want to use nboot, as I erroneously chose to do, without .i|.jffs2|.e? I don't think so, though I don't know

[U-Boot-Users] Non-block-skipping NAND commands (was: Loading from NAND using 'nboot' Periodically Fails Where 'nand read' Succeeds)

Grant Erickson wrote: Thanks for the suggestion. That solved it. As an academic exercise, is there any practical reason a system would want to use nboot, as I erroneously chose to do, without .i|.jffs2|.e? I don't think so, though I don't know the history involved. Does anyone actually use

Re: [U-Boot-Users] Non-block-skipping NAND commands (was: Loading from NAND using 'nboot' Periodically Fails Where 'nand read' Succeeds)

I would vote for making bad black handling the default. I've been working on fixing up a design of ours that mistakenly used non block skipping version and I've been trying to find all the places were bad block's were not being skipped and fixes them. Our system only uses NAND flash and people are