Hi,
we have an update protocol that normally relies on data being
received while the previous block is written to flash.
We hacked our U-Boot to provide non-blocking variants for flash
access for the relevant functions, which are:
flash_status_check_nb()
flash_full_status_check_nb()
Wolfgang Wegner wrote:
Hi,
we have an update protocol that normally relies on data being
received while the previous block is written to flash.
We hacked our U-Boot to provide non-blocking variants for flash
access for the relevant functions, which are:
flash_status_check_nb()
Jerry Van Baren wrote:
Wolfgang Wegner wrote:
Hi,
we have an update protocol that normally relies on data being
received while the previous block is written to flash.
[snip]
My 2c: Overlapping data transfer with flash erase/write operations can
be beneficial as it can reduce the
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 09:21:25AM -0400, Jerry Van Baren wrote:
Wolfgang Wegner wrote:
Is such a use case generally acceptable in U-Boot, and if so,
I'll defer to Wolfgang Denk, Stefan Roese, (Scott Wood?), and others for
this half.
:-)
anybody have an idea how to implement those
Hi Jerry,
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 10:03:49AM -0400, Jerry Van Baren wrote:
Jerry Van Baren wrote:
Wolfgang Wegner wrote:
[...]
we have an update protocol that normally relies on data being
received while the previous block is written to flash.
[...]
By the way, what sort of benefit do you
Wolfgang Wegner wrote:
Hi Jerry,
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 10:03:49AM -0400, Jerry Van Baren wrote:
Jerry Van Baren wrote:
Wolfgang Wegner wrote:
[...]
we have an update protocol that normally relies on data being
received while the previous block is written to flash.
[...]
By the way,
Dear Wolfgang Wegner,
In message 20091027125146.ga3...@leila.ping.de you wrote:
We hacked our U-Boot to provide non-blocking variants for flash
access for the relevant functions, which are:
...
Is such a use case generally acceptable in U-Boot, and if so, does
anybody have an idea how to
7 matches
Mail list logo