[U-Boot-Users] uploading OS over network instead of u-boot do wnloading it from a server.
Brian S. Park
brian at corelis.com
Tue Jun 24 21:16:09 CEST 2003
> U-boot supports the target-as-client method of downloading but does not
> > support the target-as-server method. I've used both methods a number of
> > times over the years and both have their advantages and
> disadvantages. Your
>Can you please explain the advantages of the boot loader providing
The advantage I see is this.
1. You ship 1 less piece of software. Less number of application that needs
to be installed/started is always better, IMHO, when it comes to support.
2. It makes the network configuration a bit simpler. If you do not have a
dedicated TFTP server, you must use serial console to setup the server IP
before you can boot if you change the tftp server. Users only have to worry
about 1 IP instead of 2 when setting up our product. Since large number of
our users are not very network savvy, things like this make a difference
when it comes to support.
>And if - for example during development - interactive operation is
>required or wanted, you will have to type to _one_ interface only
>(U-Boot). Otherwise you have to switch between U-Boot (start server
>function), host (run upload client), and back to U-Boot (start image
>I'm sorry, but IMHO there is no advantage running a server in the
I think this will be useful only when it is deployed to the field. I agree
that during the development, it has little advantages.
>[There _is_ some use for server-like functions in U-Boot: for
>example, many people have asked why U-Boot does not reply to ICMP
>messages (ping requests). There is no doubt that this would be a nice
>feature. On the other hand, think what it needs: you will have to
>always enable the network interface(s), you will have to deal with
>situations like when MAC addresses and/or IP addresses are not set,
>and you will have to deal with incoming network packets at any time -
>this would make the U-Boot design much more complicated. It _is_ a
>nice feature, but not worth the effort. IMHO.]
I have no idea how complicated it will be to implement server feature.
Hopefully, it would be easier to do than ping since u-boot would listen to
the incoming traffic only when commanded to do so.
Brian S. Park brian at corelis.com (562) 926-6727 x143
Everything we do helps our customers get to market
FASTER with HIGHER quality and LOWER cost
More information about the U-Boot