From: Marcus Hall <marcushall@lucent.com>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] CFI support for Versatile & Integrator/CP boards
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 11:46:59 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <44049AA3.2090800@lucent.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200602281024.13958.sr@denx.de>
Stefan Roese wrote:
> On Monday, 27. February 2006 16:59, Peter Pearse wrote:
>>- Changes flash_full_status_check() to test for timeout OR failure,
>> rather than timeout AND failure.
>
>
> I'm not sure here. Please take a look at the patch from Marcus Hall:
>
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/18530
>
> Could you and others (Marcus, Tolunay) please comment on what patch should be
> applied here. I tend to take the patch from Marcus right now.
Well, there are two variables here. I will abstract it to be
Timeout :: flash_status_check returns != ERR_OK
Fail :: status != FLASH_STATUS_DONE
The following table should correspond to what gets returned by either
code patch:
Timeout Fail Marcus Peter
0 0 ERR_OK ERR_OK
0 1 ERR_INVAL ERR_INVAL
1 0 ERR_TIMEOUT ERR_INVAL
1 1 ERR_TIMEOUT ERR_INVAL
Additionally, Peter's patch may output an additional error message after
a timeout if it appears that some error flags are set (but they are not
necessarily valid if the flash has timed out)
So, I believe that either would work to ensure that if there is an error
it does get reported, but I believe that my patch returns a more useful
return code and doesn't output potentially confusing error messages.
Marcus Hall
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-02-28 18:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-10-31 16:44 [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] CFI support for Versatile & Integrator/CP boards Peter Pearse
2006-02-27 12:29 ` Stefan Roese
2006-02-27 15:59 ` Peter Pearse
2006-02-28 9:24 ` Stefan Roese
2006-02-28 11:58 ` Peter Pearse
2006-02-28 12:30 ` Stefan Roese
2006-02-28 18:46 ` Marcus Hall [this message]
2006-02-28 19:05 ` Stefan Roese
2006-02-28 19:21 ` Tolunay Orkun
2006-02-28 19:53 ` Marcus Hall
2006-02-28 20:32 ` Tolunay Orkun
2006-02-28 16:43 ` Wolfgang Denk
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=44049AA3.2090800@lucent.com \
--to=marcushall@lucent.com \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.