[U-Boot] Need FTP client support in U-Boot

[Gilles Chanteperdrix]

On Sat, Nov 01, 2014 at 09:17:05AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Giles,
> 
> On 1 November 2014 04:10, Gilles Chanteperdrix
> <gilles.chanteperdrix at xenomai.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 01, 2014 at 10:50:06AM +0100, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 12:35:18PM +0400, Antony Pavlov wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 08:08:44 +0100
> > > > Gilles Chanteperdrix <gilles.chanteperdrix at xenomai.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 03:49:15PM +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > > > > > Dear Madhu,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In message <23c3598d8b87452eb6a3d1f52afb8a34 at SG2PR01MB0394.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com> you wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We are looking for FTP client command in U-boot commands, So that, we
> > > > > > > can boot the O.S kernel-image through ftp-client(instead of tftpboot
> > > > > > > over network).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It would have been usful if you had told us whyyou thing the existing
> > > > > > network protocols (TFTP, NFS) are not sufficient for your use cases?
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Wolfgang,
> > > > >
> > > > > if you do not mind me interfering, I have started using HTTP with
> > > > > pxelinux recently, and I can answer this question: for large files
> > > > > (such as large initramfs files,  which are practical nowadays since
> > > > > even some embedded boards have gigabytes of RAM), TCP based
> > > > > protocols are much, much faster than TFTP. That is because TFTP is a
> > > > > request/response protocol, which takes one round trip time for every
> > > > > packet asked. TCP based protocols, on the other hand benefit from
> > > > > sending several packets before getting an acknowledge, which means
> > > > > there is a "pipelining" effect.
> > > >
> > > > Hmm.
> > > >
> > > > low speed of TFTP protocol in U-boot is not a problem of TFTP protocol itself,
> > > > but problem of TFTP protocol setup.
> > >
> > > That is because you are running your tests with a network with a
> > > small round-trip time, and yes, if you augment the block size, you
> > > reduce the number of round-trips, so you reduce the duration. TCP on
> > > the other hand, will adapt the window size automatically and try and
> > > fill the pipe before waiting for an ack.
> > >
> >
> > Besides, as far as I can tell the TFTP blocksize option is not part
> > of the TFTP protocol, it is an option described in an RFC which has
> > the "draft standard" status, so, this is not standard.
> 
> I know that my IP phones have full ftp for various reasons. If you
> want to add this support to U-Boot I would be happy to review it and
> test it. It will need some TCP/IP stack code.

Thanks, I will think about this. Unfortunately, I cannot make any
promises on a delay, I am busy with other projects right now.

-- 
					    Gilles.