On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 09:34:25PM +0200, thomas.bet...@rohde-schwarz.com wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I have noticed that command repeat doesn't work as it should.
> CONFIG_SYS_HUSH_PARSER is disabled in my config.
>
> Here is what happens: main_loop() expects run_command() to return -1 for
> failure, 0 or 1 for success (not repeatable or repeatable). However,
> run_command() actually returns 1 for failure, 0 for success. So if a
> command is successful, main_loop() always thinks that it is not repeatable
> ...
>
> I guess that instead of run_command(), main_loop() should call
> builtin_run_command(). Note that main_loop() calls run_command() only when
> CONFIG_SYS_HUSH_PARSER is not enabled, and in this case, run_command()
> just calls builtin_run_command() anyway -- except that it remaps the
> return code.
>
> This issue was introduced by the patches in 2012-03-06, and in particular,
> commit 5307153236caaf2304e578c148e00a4b65cb8604, "Stop using
> builtin_run_command()".
>
> There is one other location which relies on the -1/0/1 logic, viz.,
> bedbug_main_loop(). Perhaps we need some general function which is called
> by main_loop() and bedbug_main_loop():
>
> int run_command_repeatable(const char *cmd, int flag)
> {
> #ifndef CONFIG_SYS_HUSH_PARSER
> return builtin_run_command(cmd, flag);
> #else
> if (parse_string_outer(cmd,
> FLAG_PARSE_SEMICOLON |
> FLAG_EXIT_FROM_LOOP))
> return -1;
> return 0;
> #endif
> }
>
> [Note: parse_string_outer() always returns 0 for success, 1 for failure.]
>
> Any thoughts on this? I am willing to prepare a patch, but I certainly
> don't mind if this is handled by somebody else who is deeper into u-boot
> than me.
Thoughts on this Simon? Thanks!
--
Tom
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
