Subject: Re: NAND flash support
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Bucky Katz <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 03/12/2007 11:22:04
"Toru Nishimura" <email@example.com> writes:
> Jared D. McNeill firstname.lastname@example.org wrote;
>> FYI, the MI flash layer is based on Windows CE 5.0 FMD[*] and provides
>> exactly 'B'.
> My concern is the MS spec does offer little beyond plain NOR. I was
> careful not to mention any so-called FTL or journaled filesys for flash
> device. Both of them require complicated design and implementation
> to utilize NAND spare block field which is in practice the majorl issue.
> So, the primitives must offer the way how to handle spare field.
I agree. When Jared proposed the MI layer, I posted some
recommendations wrt to NAND and have toyed with those in my NAND
I've argued before that NOR and NAND are enough different that they
really should have separate MI layers, and I still believe that to be