Dear Tolunay,
in message 430CEC01.1070800@orkun.us you wrote:
I think Wolfgang votes against this as he expects u-boot to provide him with a common view over many boards - thus seeing the hardware protection by default rather as a design decision to be abstracted by u-boot.
But, he is making an assumption on the usage of portions of flash which is not defined by U-Boot.
I am not. As I wrote before I am aware that specific requirements may exist, and that these shallbe handled where they belong to: in the board specific sections of the code.
When the answer is "Yes", the designer really desires to use that feature as presented by the hardware.
And then such board specific design shall be dealt with in board specific code.
So, should U-Boot be making the abstraction suitable for this lowest common denomiator, denying the capabilities of more featured chips? I
Yes, as the default case. But giving you each and every option to handle things as you like in your board specific code.
I think it is wrong for U-Boot to make any abstraction on any portion of flash that it does not know anything about it's use. The tools available today within U-Boot provides all the necessary and sufficient facilities to deal with any usage model.
Right. The discussion is just what the default configuration shall look like, and I get tired of pointing this out again and again.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk