Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2010 17:40:01 -0300 From: Luiz Otavio O Souza <loos.br@gmail.com> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: gjb@semihalf.com, embedded@freebsd.org, andrew@fubar.geek.nz Subject: Re: NAND Flash Framework for review Message-ID: <E1BB917F-558B-4BF8-9C8D-B173665B405D@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20100314.120453.737751539143972474.imp@bsdimp.com> References: <0AE04EFA-A3EB-4939-BD81-607C00355B67@semihalf.com> <20100314165825.121d346b@fubar.geek.nz> <CC419602-A9E8-4FE2-A5A5-0BFBD8240EDD@gmail.com> <20100314.120453.737751539143972474.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mar 14, 2010, at 3:04 PM, M. Warner Losh wrote: > Has anybody also looked at the work I did for serial flash parts on > the at91rm9200? How does that compare with this effort here (other > than I supported only one chip size)? Is that spi-connected memory > NAND? >=20 > Warner Warner, If i've picked the right driver on tree (dev/flash/at45d.c) and the = right data sheet it is not NAND, it is DataFlash and looks like Atmel = specific. The main difference here is that you don't need to worry about bad = blocks on dataflash (the same as flash). Luiz
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E1BB917F-558B-4BF8-9C8D-B173665B405D>