[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