[U-Boot] [PATCH v4 2/5] cmd_nand.c: Fix CONFIG_CMD_NAND_YAFFS

[Scott Wood]

On 03/04/2013 07:27:40 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On 03/04/2013 08:12 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
> > On 03/04/2013 04:17:10 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> >> The flag changed from WITH_INLINE_OOB to WITH_YAFFS_OOB by
> >> accident in 418396e.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini at ti.com> --- Changes in v4: - Add
> >> patch to fix CONFIG_CMD_NAND_YAFFS
> >>
> >> Changes in v3: None Changes in v2: None
> >>
> >> common/cmd_nand.c |    2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1
> >> deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/common/cmd_nand.c b/common/cmd_nand.c index
> >> 76f4d3f..d9010d2 100644 --- a/common/cmd_nand.c +++
> >> b/common/cmd_nand.c @@ -673,7 +673,7 @@ static int
> >> do_nand(cmd_tbl_t *cmdtp, int flag, int argc, char * const
> >> argv[]) } ret = nand_write_skip_bad(nand, off, &rwsize, NULL,
> >> maxsize, (u_char *)addr, -
> >> WITH_INLINE_OOB); +                        WITH_YAFFS_OOB);
> >> #endif
> >
> > Oops.  Probably a leftover from an attempt to share code between
> > yaffs and raw accesses.
> >
> > BTW, it looks like there is no board that selects
> > CONFIG_CMD_NAND_YAFFS, so it doesn't get compile tested... ...and
> > smdk6400 defines CONFIG_SYS_NAND_YAFFS_WRITE, which nothing ever
> > tests. :-P
> 
> Indeed.  We lack some real users of YAFFS in U-Boot right now, and I
> don't wish to open a can of worms on why that might be.

I see some other things in nand_write_skip_bad() that look broken for  
WITH_YAFFS_OOB (but have been there since before WITH_YAFFS_OOB was  
introduced...), in particular check_skip_len() and the call to  
nand_write() when need_skip is 0.

Sorry if some worms just popped out. :-)

-Scott