From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jerry Van Baren Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2008 08:26:49 -0500 Subject: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] Add flash programming counter] In-Reply-To: <200803071411.57287.sr@denx.de> References: <20080306163208.46EF8242FF@gemini.denx.de> <47D04779.1070404@ge.com> <47D13CD0.5030905@anagramm.de> <200803071411.57287.sr@denx.de> Message-ID: <47D14299.4090609@ge.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Stefan Roese wrote: > On Friday 07 March 2008, Clemens Koller wrote: >> ACK from my side to Jerry's version. Maybe a quite long fixed length (~40 >> characters) bar would also be reasonable and the dot-time scaled to fit the >> progress. >> >> A progress bar needs IMO two informations: >> - that it's still working... so a quite frequent output of something to >> keep me calm. - how long it will take... so I know how much time I will >> have to get the next cup of coffee to keep me tickin'. >> >> Perfect (= close to overkill, I know) would be IMO an additional output >> like: >> >> Programming Flash from 0xc0ldbeef to 0xc0ldcafe takes 112s. >> ................. | >> >> So, I don't need to estimate from the first dots how long it will take to >> complete. > > I don't think printing the programming time/speed at beginning of the > operation is doable. At least not without bigger changes. But an output at > end of the operation like: > > Wrote 512kB in 5.4 seconds (94,8 kB/s) > > would be nice. This way the developer could see, if the interface to the FLASH > chips is optimized. But I think this is overkill too. Let's concentrate on a > clean progress bar with a fixed length. > > Patches welcome. :) > > Best regards, > Stefan All but the timing part ;-) Best regards, gvb