From: Tolunay Orkun <listmember@orkun.us>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] cfi_flash.c patches
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 11:49:59 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <430A0237.9060703@orkun.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050822161708.3365F352B0C@atlas.denx.de>
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>In message <4309F122.5090907@orkun.us> you wrote:
>
>
>
>>The point is you can simply use already available "protect off"
>>mechanism to lift the lock on these sectors instead of defining
>>
>>
>
>You can do this, but I would reject such a broken implementation.
>
>
I guess I do not understand what is broken by having to use "protect
off" for a flash that auto protects all sectors. If you automatically
unlock sectors how do you know that sector X that was explicitly locked
or not. I would personally err on being on the safe side and keep it
locked until explicitly told by the user to unlock the sectors prior to
be written.
I consider unlocking all sectors unconditionally is broken implementation.
>U-Boot shall come up with writapble flash, except for the few
>protected sectors where U-Boot itself lives (plus the environment,
>plus eventually FPGA images needed to boot the hardware).
>
>
What about the sectors that are not in direct use by U-Boot. If I put a
lock on a certain sector in Linux I would certainly would like to keep
that lock to remain in that state across boot. U-Boot does not have any
knowledge of the use of these other sectors and should not make
assumptions on their lock/unlock state.
Best regards,
Tolunay
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-08-22 16:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-08-19 4:27 [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] cfi_flash.c patches Sangmoon Kim
2005-08-19 18:36 ` Tolunay Orkun
2005-08-22 5:37 ` Sangmoon Kim
2005-08-22 6:31 ` Tolunay Orkun
2005-08-22 7:13 ` Sangmoon Kim
2005-08-22 15:37 ` Tolunay Orkun
2005-08-22 16:17 ` Wolfgang Denk
2005-08-22 16:49 ` Tolunay Orkun [this message]
2005-08-22 20:49 ` Wolfgang Denk
2005-08-22 16:41 ` Scott McNutt
2005-08-23 1:53 ` Sangmoon Kim
2005-08-22 7:58 ` Wolfgang Denk
2005-08-22 17:02 ` Tolunay Orkun
2005-08-22 20:53 ` Wolfgang Denk
2005-08-22 22:05 ` Tolunay Orkun
2005-08-22 22:46 ` Wolfgang Denk
2005-08-23 7:14 ` Yuli Barcohen
2005-08-23 8:39 ` Sangmoon Kim
2005-08-23 14:47 ` Brian Waite
2005-08-23 20:24 ` Wolfgang Denk
2005-08-24 5:58 ` Yuli Barcohen
2005-08-24 16:00 ` Detlev Zundel
2005-08-24 21:52 ` Tolunay Orkun
2005-08-24 23:12 ` Wolfgang Denk
2005-08-25 14:37 ` Brian Waite
2005-08-25 16:37 ` Tolunay Orkun
2005-08-26 14:12 ` U-Boot policy on flash protection (was [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] cfi_flash.c patches) Detlev Zundel
2005-08-26 14:45 ` Wolfgang Denk
2006-02-28 16:34 ` [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] cfi_flash.c patches Wolfgang Denk
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-08-19 18:47 Woodruff, Richard
2005-08-19 20:16 ` Tolunay Orkun
2005-08-19 20:22 Woodruff, Richard
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=430A0237.9060703@orkun.us \
--to=listmember@orkun.us \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox