Hello Hans! Am 05.07.2015 11:54, schrieb Hans de Goede:
This seems like a good idea to me, am I reading both the --help and the code correctly that this only writes u-boot but does not do the necessary fel exe 0x..... ? It seems to me that such a command should also execute u-boot.
You're right - the "fel exe" is kept separate. This is done on purpose to allow uploading other elements via FEL (e.g. boot script, kernel, initrd). Execution of the bootloader always comes last.
Other then that this looks good to me any reason this is an RFC? I would be happy to merge this even with the TODO in place.
I just wanted further input / some more opinions on it, as I'm not completely sure it would be the best way to achieve this. For example, I originally intended to extend the existing "spl" command with a load address (to tell it to transfer the u-boot part to that destination). But then I realized that the image already contains a target address, and that "fel spl" would still have a purpose of its own (when used with u-boot-spl.bin). Would we want more flexibility by allowing an optional (dest) address specification? I'd have gone straight for that, but unfortunately argument parsing / handling in fel.c isn't too flexible... Nevertheless the patch is fully functional and has been tested to work on a Banana Pi (sun7i). Regards, B. Nortmann -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "linux-sunxi" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
