[U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] Update OMAP242x for git head (plus sign).
listmember at orkun.us
Fri Sep 30 00:07:11 CEST 2005
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>>Unlocking all sectors on these parts would change the current behavior
>>of the boards unless either the environment variable is defined or board
>>config file is also updated.
> Yes. From my point of view this means fixing these boards :-)
>>Also, Instead of all black or white, why don't we have unlock regions
>>for partial unlocking sections of flash like like jffs2 partitions? E.g.
> That would be even more confusing for most users.
> Sorry, I can perfectly understand your intentions from a developers
> point of view. But guess how many users there are for each of us
> developers? They outnumber us many, many times. And even if there was
> perfect documentation for each of the ports - guess how many users
> would not read it? Providing the same look and feel across all
> implementations is an important issue for me. And I see it as a part
> of my task as a maintainer to keep the design simple and predictable.
OK. Probably an on/off knob for user is enough. I think board designer
needs a bit more help in setting a policy for his/her board.
Would you consider something like CFG_FLASH_PROTECT_LIST in board config
file which defines an array of blocks that needs to be kept protected?
This would be a list similar to CFG_FLASH_BANKS_LIST. This would take
care of important sections of flash (beyond u-boot and environment) that
needs to be protected for that particular board.
More information about the U-Boot