[U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] cfi_flash.c patches

Tolunay Orkun listmember at orkun.us
Mon Aug 22 18:49:59 CEST 2005


Wolfgang Denk wrote:

>In message <4309F122.5090907 at orkun.us> you wrote:
>  
>
>
>>The point is you can simply use already available "protect off"
>>mechanism to lift the lock on these sectors instead of defining
>>    
>>
>
>You can do this, but I would reject such a broken implementation.
>  
>
I guess I do not understand what is broken by having to use "protect 
off" for a flash that auto protects all sectors. If you automatically 
unlock sectors how do you know that sector X that was explicitly locked 
or not. I would personally err on being on the safe side and keep it 
locked until explicitly told by the user to unlock the sectors prior to 
be written.

I consider unlocking all sectors unconditionally is broken implementation.

>U-Boot shall come  up  with  writapble  flash,  except  for  the  few
>protected  sectors  where  U-Boot itself lives (plus the environment,
>plus eventually FPGA images needed to boot the hardware).
>  
>

What about the sectors that are not in direct use by U-Boot. If I put a 
lock on a certain sector in Linux I would certainly would like to keep 
that lock to remain in that state across boot. U-Boot does not have any 
knowledge of the use of these other sectors and should not make 
assumptions on their lock/unlock state.

Best regards,
Tolunay





More information about the U-Boot mailing list