[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 5/5] cgtqmx6eval: Protect the manufacturing information in SPI NOR

[Jagan Teki]

On 23 September 2015 at 22:51, Otavio Salvador
<otavio.salvador at ossystems.com.br> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Jagan Teki <jteki at openedev.com> wrote:
>> On 23 September 2015 at 22:21, Otavio Salvador
>> <otavio.salvador at ossystems.com.br> wrote:
>>> Hello Jagan,
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 12:56 PM, Jagan Teki <jteki at openedev.com> wrote:
>>>> All looks fine as per your patches, but probing flash from board files
>>>> isn't a good approach if one more board add similar  approach.
>>>>
>>>> I have an idea similar to "cfi_flash" approach.
>>>>
>>>> "sf protect on off len" then based on the offset and len write the
>>>> protected bits and skips the sectors which are protected by showing
>>>> warning say "protected sectors will not be erased!" [1]
>>>>
>>>> Use the Linux approach[2] for more information, let me know for any more inputs.
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://www.denx.de/wiki/view/DULG/UBootCmdGroupFlash#Section_5.9.3.4.
>>>> [2] http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/drivers/mtd/devices/m25p80.c?id=972e1b7b450a93589b2a4c709e68f68da059aa5c
>>>
>>> I think this is a good option however, can we include this one for
>>> this release and we can improve it for next?
>>
>> Do you have any defined schedule on coming release about this feature,
>> because right now sf has lot of pending items to tune - I'm unable add
>> again this on TODO list that become big task in future.
>>
>> If you have any time, please start the suggested approach I would help
>> at any moment.
>
> We are adding support for a number of different SoM part numbers from
> Congatec and the SPI protection is required for we be able to merge
> the SPL and 2015.10 to be usable for them.
>
> I can commit to work in this feature for 2016.01.

Sorry, I understand your concern - but it's very difficult for me to
maintain the drop_code (which should again removed later). Why can't
you just add code as per my suggestion.. just a basic support as you
aware probably will move the same in coming release if all set,
because extending functionality is better approach rather than add it
remove the same.

Thanks for your commitment, let me know if you need any more help.

thanks!
-- 
Jagan | openedev.