On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 02:05:55PM +0100, Daniel Hobi wrote:
> Depending on offset, flash size and the number of bad blocks,
> get_len_incl_bad may return a too small value which may lead to:
>
> 1) If there are no bad blocks, nand_{read,write}_skip_bad chooses the
> bad block aware read/write code. This may hurt performance, but does
> not have any adverse effects.
>
> 2) If there are bad blocks, the nand_{read,write}_skip_bad may choose
> the bad block unaware read/write code (if len_incl_bad == *length)
> which leads to corrupted data.
It could also lead to the rejection of accesses near the end of flash.
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Hobi <[email protected]>
> ---
> @Scott: please review
> @Wolfgang: please consider for 2009.11
Applied to next. I think it's too late for 2009.12, since it's supposed to
be released tomorrow according to http://www.denx.de/wiki/U-Boot/ReleaseCycle,
and it's not a regression from the previous version.
-Scott
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
