Dear Nicolas,
in message KAEELLICOFHDAEPIACDEKEPOCFAA.nicolas.lacressonniere@rfo.atmel.com you wrote:
Our board does not use any parallel flash part... So if I enable CFG_CMD_FLASH flag, I need to add an unnecessary flash.c file in board/at91sam9261ek directory in order to have access to low-level flash functions (flash_init...) So do I have to create such a file with empty functions? Or can we create another set of command? What do you think is best?
You don;t need a file flash.c in your board directory; there are many boards without such a file - for example all boards using the CFI flash driver. It does not matter where the function flash_init() gets implemented - and you will need some function like that, too.
The question if we want to have special commands for dataflash was discussed a long time ago when the first board added support for such devices. By then it was decided that the standard flash commands (protect, erase, cp, flinfo) shall be used for dataflash, too, so that the behaviour is completely transparent for the user. I still think that was a good decision.
Also, I don't see any need for a "dflc init" command - such initialization should be done when needed and without needing manual user interaction.
OK, I will remove it.
Just rename this code into flash_init() and one of the problems mentioned above just disappears...
And "dflc info" is supposed to be part of the "flinfo" output on your hardware.
See first part...
See above. Please support the standard flinfo command.
- Add addr2ram verification in do_mem_cp function.
I also reject the patch because I think that such "verification" is a bad thing.
OK, I will remove it.
Thanks.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk