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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox