From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Wolfgang Wegner <wolfgang@leila.ping.de>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 16:24:51 +0100
Subject: [U-Boot] non-blocking flash functions - is this
	possible/acceptable?
In-Reply-To: <4AE6F3D5.5060403@ge.com>
References: <20091027125146.GA3216@leila.ping.de> <4AE6F3D5.5060403@ge.com>
Message-ID: <20091027152451.GC3216@leila.ping.de>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 09:21:25AM -0400, Jerry Van Baren wrote:
> Wolfgang Wegner wrote:
> >Is such a use case generally acceptable in U-Boot, and if so,
> 
> I'll defer to Wolfgang Denk, Stefan Roese, (Scott Wood?), and others for 
> this half.

:-)

> >anybody have an idea how to implement those without all this duplicate
> >code?
> 
> Move the code to the non-blocking functions (which you have already 
> done), and then implement the blocking versions as wrappers that simply 
> call the non-blocking write followed by a loop calling 
> flash_status_check_nb() until the write is complete.  For erase, you 
> would need a loop to do the multi-sector erase as multiple non-blocking 
> + wait operations.

I will try this and see if it looks clean after implementing.

Thanks for the hint.

Regards,
Wolfgang