Hello Pavel,
On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 11:26 AM, Pavel Machek pavel@denx.de wrote:
On Mon 2014-11-03 18:49:58, Suriyan Ramasami wrote:
Change the interface for the generic FS functions to take in an extra parameter of type "loff_t *" to return the size. The return values of these funtions now serve as an indicator of error conditions alone.
Signed-off-by: Suriyan Ramasami suriyan.r@gmail.com
Changes in v6:
- Simon - Split this into a separate patch
Changes in v5:
- Simon - update fs.h with comments for fs_read/fs_write/fs_size
common/cmd_fs.c | 17 +++++++++++++ fs/fs.c | 77 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------- include/fs.h | 41 ++++++++++++++++++------------ 3 files changed, 88 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
diff --git a/common/cmd_fs.c b/common/cmd_fs.c index 6754340..f70cb8a 100644 --- a/common/cmd_fs.c +++ b/common/cmd_fs.c @@ -51,6 +51,23 @@ U_BOOT_CMD( " If 'pos' is 0 or omitted, the file is read from the start." )
+static int do_save_wrapper(cmd_tbl_t *cmdtp, int flag, int argc,
char * const argv[])+{
return do_save(cmdtp, flag, argc, argv, FS_TYPE_ANY);+}
+U_BOOT_CMD(
save, 7, 0, do_save_wrapper,"save file to a filesystem","<interface> [<dev[:part]> [<addr> [<filename> [bytes [pos]]]]]\n"That's not correct, AFAICT.
int do_save(cmd_tbl_t *cmdtp, int flag, int argc, char * const argv[], int fstype) { unsigned long addr; const char *filename; unsigned long bytes; unsigned long pos; int len; unsigned long time;
if (argc < 6 || argc > 7) return CMD_RET_USAGE;More arguments are mandatory then you describe here.
You are correct. All the way upto "bytes" is mandatory. I shall change the arguments as follows: "<interface> dev:part <addr> <filename> <bytes> [pos]\n"
" - Save binary file 'filename' to partition 'part' on device\n"" type 'interface' instance 'dev' from addr 'addr' in memory.\n"" 'bytes' gives the size to save in bytes and is mandatory.\n"" 'pos' gives the file byte position to start writing to.\n"" If 'pos' is 0 or omitted, the file is written from the start."Plus maybe note if it can extend existing files and create files if they don't exit would be nice here?
As this is the generic interface and interacts with fat/ext/sandbox, it depends on their respective implementation. For example a non zero "pos" is not yet handled in ext4, whereas its supported in "fat". Hence, I wonder if its apt at this stage to make those statements.
Thanks for the comments! - Suriyan
-- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html