[U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] Update OMAP242x for git head (plus sign).

Tolunay Orkun 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.

Best regards,

More information about the U-Boot mailing list