From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161112AbWHDIm3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Aug 2006 04:42:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161113AbWHDIm3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Aug 2006 04:42:29 -0400 Received: from canuck.infradead.org ([205.233.218.70]:32384 "EHLO canuck.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161112AbWHDIm2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Aug 2006 04:42:28 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] MTD: Add lock/unlock operations for Atmel AT49BV6416 From: David Woodhouse To: Haavard Skinnemoen Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <1154680114836-git-send-email-hskinnemoen@atmel.com> References: <11546801142874-git-send-email-hskinnemoen@atmel.com> <1154680114836-git-send-email-hskinnemoen@atmel.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 16:41:12 +0800 Message-Id: <1154680873.31031.182.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.2 (2.6.2-1.fc5.6.dwmw2.1) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by canuck.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2006-08-04 at 10:28 +0200, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote: > What's the best way to do this? Unlock the flash in the board-specific > mapping driver perhaps? That's what we used to do. If more people are emulating the Intel brain damage and having chips which render the lock operation entirely pointless by locking the chips at every power cycle, then I suppose we ought to consider making auto-unlock a function of the chip type. -- dwmw2