From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Heiko Schocher Date: Tue, 28 May 2013 08:24:06 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot] dfu: dfu and UBI Volumes In-Reply-To: <20130528055824.3606538116A@gemini.denx.de> References: <519F97CA.4060901@denx.de> <6AD958CB-3CFC-4362-B72D-511147D041AC@antoniou-consulting.com> <20130524171213.GT17119@bill-the-cat> <51A1B522.2050405@denx.de> <20130527192135.GX17119@bill-the-cat> <51A42CCD.1020607@denx.de> <20130528055824.3606538116A@gemini.denx.de> Message-ID: <51A44D86.2050108@denx.de> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Hello Wolfgang, Am 28.05.2013 07:58, schrieb Wolfgang Denk: > Dear Heiko, > > In message <51A42CCD.1020607@denx.de> you wrote: >> >>> I would imagine, but testing and implementation might show a better way, >>> we do UBI as ubi ubiN volume-name, ie: >>> rootfs ubi ubi0 rootfs >>> user ubi ubi0 user-data >>> and so forth, and augment dfu_nand.c with UBI knowledge, ala dfu_mmc and >>> fat/ext knowledge. >> >> Yes, I think, thats the way to go ... > > I doubt that dfu_nand.c is the right place for this. What if I start > using DFU on NOR flash? The decisions which device type (NAND, MMC, > NOR, USB mass storage, ...) to habdle on one side, and which partition > type / image type (raw, UBI volume, file, ...) on the other side are > fully orthogonal to each other. They should be handled by independent > code, and not one of them repeated for all implementations of the > other. Yes, exactly ... bye, Heiko -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany