On 7/3/2007 2:27 PM, Stefan Roese wrote:
And that's why I have to ask: Do we really need this command extension? Why not just use a combination of commands (e.g. "nand read.jffs2 ...;bootm ...)?
Using "nand read.jffs2 ...;bootm ..." has one disadvantage compared to the new "nboot.jffs2 ...". For the first command sequence u-boot has to read a fixed number of bytes from the NAND. You have to make big enough to support the largest possible image for your application. If the image is smaller u-boot will still have to read this fixed number of bytes. For "nboot" resp. "nboot.jffs2" u-boot will read only as much data from NAND as necessary. This might give some performance improvement. BTW: when you ask for the need of the command "nboot.jffs2" you probably should question the pure "nboot" as well. It can be replaced by "nand read ...;bootm ..." as well.
if (s != NULL &&(!strcmp(s, ".jffs2") || !strcmp(s, ".e") || !strcmp(s, ".i"))){jffs2 = 1;}No parentheses for one lined statements please.
Sorry for that.
Best regards, Thomas
SECM PD Mch Siemens Enterprise Communications Manufacturing GmbH & Co KG Hertzstrasse 2 04329 Leipzig