![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Fri, 15 Sep 2006 09:00:30 +0100 David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org> wrote: > I'm coming to the conclusion that if there are flash chips which > inherit the Intel insanity of automatically locking themselves on > every power cycle, thus rendering the 'locked' status meaningless, we > should just automatically unlock the whole chip at boot time, from > the _chip_ driver. Yeah, there really is no reason to keep anything "soft locked". I'll unlock the chip from the fixup I submitted earlier so that it comes up unlocked by default. > So it's trapped for moderation and I > get to look at it and manually approve it. I'll keep doing it, then. That way, I can be sure that you'll notice my patches, too ;) Thanks, Haavard - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-09-15 10:25 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||