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

Detlev Zundel dzu at denx.de
Wed Aug 24 18:00:01 CEST 2005


Hello all,

sorry for jumping in so late in this discussion but I just want to
make my opinion heard.

For what its worth, I consider "unlocking everything besides u-boot
relevant code (or add something to the opposite in your board code)"
as policy.  I think U-Boot should provide the mechanisms, i.e. commands
to protect and unprotect sectors and by correctly indicating protected
sectors in the fli display.

As it seems from my perspective, these latter goals have already been
achieved with the available commands.  They leave sector protection to
be an aspect of the hardware that is not influenced implicitely or per
default by u-boot running effectively including hardware design
decisions being included in the way u-boot runs.

I think Wolfgang votes against this as he expects u-boot to provide
him with a common view over many boards - thus seeing the hardware
protection by default rather as a design decision to be abstracted by
u-boot.

Therefore I guess one question that should drive the design of u-boot
code is

Q: Is hardware protection in flash chips a deliberate measure by the
   board designer not to be abstracted by the bootloader?

If the answer is "no" then the current design is presenting this
u-boot abstraction on every board.

If on the other hand the answer is "yes" then I think u-boot should
not make all flash writable by default.

Just my 2 cents - Cheers
  Detlev

-- 
Another helpful hint for successful MIME processing:

application/msword; rm -f %s; description="MS Word Text";




More information about the U-Boot mailing list