[U-Boot] [PATCH v3] imls: Add support to list images in NAND device
Scott Wood
scottwood at freescale.com
Tue Dec 18 01:05:12 CET 2012
On 12/17/2012 02:22:40 AM, Vipin Kumar wrote:
> On 12/14/2012 11:40 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
>> On 12/14/2012 03:32:04 AM, Vipin Kumar wrote:
>>>>> +
>>>>> + switch (genimg_get_format(buffer)) {
>>>>> + case IMAGE_FORMAT_LEGACY:
>>>>> + header = (const image_header_t *)buffer;
>>>>> + len = image_get_image_size(header);
>>>>> +
>>>>> + ret = nand_imls_legacyimage(nand,
>>>>> nand_dev,
>>>>> + off, len);
>>>>> + if (ret< 0&& ret != -ENOMEM)
>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>> + break;
>>>>> +#if defined(CONFIG_FIT)
>>>>> + case IMAGE_FORMAT_FIT:
>>>>> + len = fit_get_size(buffer);
>>>>> + ret = nand_imls_fitimage(nand, nand_dev,
>>>>> + off, len);
>>>>> + if (ret< 0&& ret != -ENOMEM)
>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>> + break;
>>>>> +#endif
>>>>> + }
>>>>
>>>> Do you really mean to return from the main imls function just
>>>> because
>>>> one image has an error? By "use return" I meant return from the
>>>> subfunction.
>>>>
>>>
>>> This return only corresponds to the situation when there is an error
>>> returned from nand read routine. In that case, I don't think there
>>> is
>>> any use reading the NAND any further.
>>
>> Just because one page has an uncorrectable error doesn't mean the
>> entire NAND is bad. Note that this is different from what you
>> currently do if you get an error on the initial read where you look
>> for
>> a header.
>>
>
> Yes, I got your point.
>
> I would now not announce the uncorrectable errors as they may hog the
> whole stdout and still continue to work for the whole NAND device.
> Please check the implementation in v4
I'd rather see errors be announced, with some reasonable limit on how
many (and a message indicating if further errors exist that were
suppressed).
-Scott
More information about the U-Boot
mailing list