)]}'
{"/PATCHSET_LEVEL":[{"author":{"_account_id":1000687,"name":"Tomas Vanek","display_name":"Tomas Vanek","email":"vanekt@fbl.cz","username":"vanekt"},"change_message_id":"5a746cdb582611efa5696a9b58945a97d6a843a3","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"7e97a2fe_fb01c92a","updated":"2026-01-03 09:55:36.000000000","message":"Thanks Marc. Seems me sufficient","commit_id":"e93a65009d7b9bce03e4376e73b3fed4506e68b0"},{"author":{"_account_id":1000853,"name":"zapb","display_name":"Marc Schink","email":"dev@zapb.de","username":"zapb"},"change_message_id":"1fadcab9f525aaf2c4e16a51fb28c280f45474f4","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"8aecf06e_4804ddde","updated":"2025-12-17 12:09:21.000000000","message":"Tomas, this is a workaround to have non-flash NVM and sectorless bank support now and without heavy changes in the code base.\n\nI think in the future we can remove the \"cached\" erase state entirely from the flash infrastructure. What do you think? We do not rely on the erase state at all, correct? So in my opinion we could change the `erase_check()` API in a way that it returns directly the erase state. Something like that:\n\n```\nstruct flash_erase_state {\n  bool bank_erased;\n  bool *sector_erased;\n};\n\nint erase_check(struct flash_bank *bank, struct flash_erase_state *state) {\n  ...\n}\n```\n\n`bank_erased` is always valid and if we have sectors the array contains information about the erase state of the individual sectors.","commit_id":"e93a65009d7b9bce03e4376e73b3fed4506e68b0"}]}