<p><br>
On May 11, 2012 5:31 AM, "Alejandro Martínez" <<a href="mailto:zen@itram.es">zen@itram.es</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 11:19 PM, David Given <<a href="mailto:dg@cowlark.com">dg@cowlark.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> > The device driver code is in drivers/block/sun4i_nand/nfd; the low level<br>
> > stuff including the wear levelling code is in<br>
> > drivers/block/sun4i_nand/src. I have utterly no idea whether it's any<br>
> > good. Anyone know why they didn't implement an mtdblock driver and use<br>
> > yaffs2?<br>
><br>
> The partition format, as well as the firmware file format and the<br>
> flashing tools, come from other older SoCs such as the Sochip 8600.<br>
> This last one, for example, was mainly used for PMPs and didn't use<br>
> Linux/Android, they generally used their own closed operating system.<br>
><br>
> So, yeah, there seems to be no reason apart from trying to reuse old code.<br>
i think so. reusing old code saves a lot. the short to market time makes everything remain the same. i want a better partition format, better firmware format, linux friendly flashing tools, but changing means risk. everything now is working fine. so nobody want to change.<br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> arm-netbook mailing list <a href="mailto:arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk">arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook">http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook</a><br>
> Send large attachments to <a href="mailto:arm-netbook@files.phcomp.co.uk">arm-netbook@files.phcomp.co.uk</a><br>
</p>