The increase happens because the NAND erase function was using 1000 for a timeout so I just increased the general timeout to that amount. I don't think it should be a big deal because the timeout shouldn't happen normally.
By the way, what is top-posting and how do I stop? // Dean Glazeski On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 2:32 AM, Marek Vasut <marek.va...@gmail.com> wrote: > Dne Pá 18. prosince 2009 06:11:23 Dean Glazeski napsal(a): > > Sorry, I took another look and saw what you were talking about and how to > > correct for it. Here's another version that addresses that issue. > > > > // Dean Glazeski > > > > On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 10:56 PM, Dean Glazeski <dngl...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Oh, I didn't see that. This patch can be ignored then. It just looks > so > > > similar :). > > > > > > // Dean Glazeski > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 10:29 PM, David Brownell <davi...@pacbell.net > >wrote: > > >> On Tuesday 15 December 2009, Dean Glazeski wrote: > > >> > I noticed the NAND erase function was doing page command stuff, so I > > >> > > >> pulled > > >> > > >> > the redundant code out. Patch is attached > > >> > > >> This doesn't look right. Consider the 16 Gbit large page chip > > >> I happen to have on some boards here: > > >> > > >> - read/write of 2KB page uses 5 byte addressing > > >> - erase of 128KB block uses 3 byte addressping > > >> > > >> You're making both use the 5 byte addressing ... basically, if > > >> this is going to be shared, the erase commands shouldn't be > > >> writing column addresses, just row addresses. > > >> > > >> - Dave > > > > Why are you incrementing the timeout from 100 to 1000 in the > nand_page_command ? > btw. please stop top-posting. >
_______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
