On 08/04/2011 03:14 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Scott Wood,
In message4E3AF62B.8080605@freescale.com you wrote:
Again, I think "nand hwfunc" conveys little information about what it's actually going to do, versus something like:
=> nandrbl off
I agree with Heiko that NAND related commands should be implemented as subcommands of the "nand" command.
Havong "nand<subcommand>" and "nandrbl" at the same time is not acceptable to me - that should be changed into "nand rbl".
At least "nand hwfunc type" or "nand hwfunc rbl" would be more informative, but I question the benefit that the verbosity buys us.
I agree that "hwfunc" is an unlucky name.
So now it's "nand hwfunc ctrl type rbl"? Just to avoid grepping for U_BOOT_CMD?
No. I would not like this either.
How about some way of board/controller/etc. code plugging in commands to "nand" without "hwfunc"? Could be a chained handler, or copying entries into a command table, or some way of generalizing the stuff in common/command.c to operate on multiple command lists. Though without some change to how linker scripts are managed, to be practical that last option would need to avoid introducing a new section per subtable (maybe just filter out others when iterating). Would be nice to get tab completion on subcommands.
-Scott