From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jorgen Lundman Date: Mon, 07 May 2012 16:13:33 +0900 Subject: [U-Boot] uboot and ZFS In-Reply-To: <201205051526.52499.marex@denx.de> References: <4FA0A7F3.8010803@lundman.net> <201205030213.35048.marex@denx.de> <4FA2172D.9080106@lundman.net> <201205051526.52499.marex@denx.de> Message-ID: <4FA7761D.90704@lundman.net> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de > If you correctly skip the HW init, you can try booting u-boot from u-boot ... > (now, WD will hate me for bringing this up :-) ). It's possible, but unsupported > operation. You might need to do some research on this matter :-) > I was thinking more along the lines of; Since I am testing a filesystem driver, to have a small test binary I can run and just feed a patch to (be it block device, or raw file) to test it can traverse, and read the contents. But it would not be so bad to simulate that with some #ifdefs I guess. >> What is the general patch acceptance around, I see ext4 wasn't accepted, >> what are the chances my patches would be? > > Why wasn't ext4 accepted? I have no idea. I found the patches back in Dec, and it is not in the repository. Although, I have patched it into my tree on github, it might help merging it into uboot. It does appear to work, whereas my zfs does not :) CuBox>> zfsls usb 0:2 ** Bad partition - usb 0:2 ** CuBox>> zfsls usb 0:1 ** Bad partition - usb 0:1 ** CuBox>> zfsls usb 0:0 data abort pc : [<0063ea0c>] lr : [<0060eef0>] sp : 005ffe40 ip : 00000000 fp : 00000000 r10: 00000000 r9 : 00652a4c r8 : 005fffcc r7 : 00000000 r6 : 00000000 r5 : 007104b0 r4 : 006444a7 r3 : 00000000 r2 : 006f7b80 r1 : 00000000 r0 : ea000012 Flags: nZCv IRQs off FIQs off Mode SVC_32 Resetting CPU ... Dang :) Lund -- Jorgen Lundman | Unix Administrator | +81 (0)3 -5456-2687 ext 1017 (work) Shibuya-ku, Tokyo | +81 (0)90-5578-8500 (cell) Japan | +81 (0)3 -3375-1767 (home)