From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f49.google.com ([209.85.215.49]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.76 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1RW2d2-0003nL-R0 for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 01 Dec 2011 09:08:29 +0000 Received: by lagu2 with SMTP id u2so795216lag.36 for ; Thu, 01 Dec 2011 01:08:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] mtd api changed to return bitflips on read operations From: Artem Bityutskiy To: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2011 11:08:24 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20111129144042.1979a587@skate> References: <1322528477-19666-1-git-send-email-mikedunn@newsguy.com> <20111129144042.1979a587@skate> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <1322730506.2332.30.camel@koala> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: Artem Bityutskiy , Lars-Peter Clausen , Mike Dunn , Scott Branden , Wan ZongShun , Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov , Robert Jarzmik , Sukumar Ghorai , Manuel Lauss , Haojian Zhuang , Kyungmin Park , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, Ralf Baechle , Jiandong Zheng , Andres Salomon , Olof Johansson , Jamie Iles , Brian Norris , David Woodhouse , Vimal Singh Reply-To: dedekind1@gmail.com List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 14:40 +0100, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > Also, another option is to allow max_bitflips to be NULL, which would > simplify things such as : Yes, I vote for this solution. > Another question: is the max_bitflips information sufficient (i.e on a > large read with multiple pages, you will only get the value for the > worst page) ? Don't you need the bitflip count on a per-page basis ? I do not think we need accurate per-page information. Artem.