On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 01:38, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Indeed, that block looks weird to its author today as well. But
> inverting the logic completely defeats the purpose of lazy mode
> switching (will likely file a patch to remove the block).
Looking at the 2nd parameter to the call, and the
pflash
On 2011-04-03 22:16, Jordan Justen wrote:
> When checking pfl->rom_mode for when to lazily reenter ROMD mode,
> the value was check was the opposite of what it should have been.
> This prevent the part from returning to ROMD mode after a write
> was made to the CFI rom region.
>
> Signed-off-by: J
