Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Wed, 11 Apr 2012 16:10:45 -0700 | From | Greg KH <> | Subject | [ 10/59] mtd: nand: gpmi: use correct member for checking NAND_BBT_USE_FLASH |
| |
3.2-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de>
commit 5289966ea576a062b80319975b31b661c196ff9d upstream.
This has been moved from .options to .bbt_options meanwhile. So, it currently checks for something totally different (NAND_OWN_BUFFERS) and decides according to that.
Artem Bityutskiy: the options were moved in a40f734 mtd: nand: consolidate redundant flash-based BBT flags
Artem Bityutskiy: CCing -stable
Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de> Acked-by: Huang Shijie <b32955@freescale.com> Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy <artem.bityutskiy@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <David.Woodhouse@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
--- drivers/mtd/nand/gpmi-nand/gpmi-nand.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/gpmi-nand/gpmi-nand.c +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/gpmi-nand/gpmi-nand.c @@ -1124,7 +1124,7 @@ static int gpmi_block_markbad(struct mtd chip->bbt[block >> 2] |= 0x01 << ((block & 0x03) << 1); /* Do we have a flash based bad block table ? */ - if (chip->options & NAND_BBT_USE_FLASH) + if (chip->bbt_options & NAND_BBT_USE_FLASH) ret = nand_update_bbt(mtd, ofs); else { chipnr = (int)(ofs >> chip->chip_shift);
| |