Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Bartek, > > in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: >>> I think "auto-update" is not a good name (especially since it has a >>> different meaning than the similar sounding "autoload"0; also there is >>> a typo in "sofware". >>> >>> But most of all - do we really need a new environment variable? What's >>> wrong with our good old "bootfile" ? >> The only concern here is the interaction with bootp and dhcp commands -- >> they will set the "bootfile" env. variable to the file name >> got from the server, and the next time around U-Boot will try to use >> that file name to get the update. So I'd rather stick with a separate >> env. variable for the name of the update file. > > I see. Maybe we should call the variable "updatefile" or similar, > then?
How about "au_file"? "updatefile" suffers from similarity to the commonly used (although not documented) "update" env. variable. But I'm fine either way, just let me know what you prefer. [...] >>>> @@ -290,6 +293,10 @@ void main_loop (void) >>>> char bcs_set[16]; >>>> #endif /* CONFIG_BOOTCOUNT_LIMIT */ >>>> >>>> +#if defined(CONFIG_AU_TFTP) >>>> + au_tftp (); >>>> +#endif /* CONFIG_AU_TFTP */ >>>> + >>>> #if defined(CONFIG_VFD) && defined(VFD_TEST_LOGO) >>>> ulong bmp = 0; /* default bitmap */ >>>> extern int trab_vfd (ulong bitmap); >>> You definitely don't want to add the function call right in the >>> middle of variable declarations, or do you? >> The idea is to have au_tftp() called as early as possible, before any >> other functions in main_loop(). > > Yes, but this is C, not C++, so declarations go only at the bginning > of the function, then follows code (and no more declarations unless > you open a new block). > >> So if we move the call to au_tftp() someplace below, then when >> both CONFIG_VFD and VFD_TEST_LOGO are defined, we'll have a call to >> trab_vfd(), which will happen before the software update. > > So you will either have to add some more #ifdef's, or think what > could happen if the VFD (Vacuum Fluorescent Display) initialization > code runs first - I would not expect any negative impact? I don't think there will be any negative impact per se, the update procedure will just start a bit later (the time needed to display the bitmap on the FVD). Will move au_tftp() call till after the VFD stuff. Regards, Bartlomiej Sieka _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
