Robin Getz wrote: > On Wed 22 Jul 2009 16:32, Ben Warren pondered:> Robin Getz wrote: > >>> On Wed 22 Jul 2009 10:04, jeffery palmer pondered: >>> >>> >>>> We are looking for an http client now as well. Our major issue revolves >>>> >>>> >>> around the download times for tftp. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Can Volkmar Uhlig kindly provide the patches? >>>> >>>> Our units automically update themselves inside of uboot giving us the most >>>> control over our firmware. The issue is that it takes 20 minutes via a DSL >>>> line in Africa to update our units. An http test showed that the same >>>> firmware downloads in 30 seconds. We have also added things like the >>>> blksize >>>> parameter to the uboot tftp client to get it down to 20 minutes, our >>>> original download times were ~50 minutes. >>>> >>>> >>> Hmm -- I'm assuming that is http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1783.html ? >>> >>> Do you have a patch to send - or that I can clean up and submit? >>> >>> >>> >> Requesting a bigger blocksize is already implemented and should work if >> the server supports it. It's been a while since I used this, but it was >> added along with support for multicast TFTP, probably about a year ago. >> > > I see: > > #define TFTP_MTU_BLOCKSIZE 1468blksize > static unsigned short TftpBlkSizeOption=TFTP_MTU_BLOCKSIZE; > > /* try for more effic. blk size */ > pkt += sprintf((char *)pkt,"blksize%c%d%c", > 0,TftpBlkSizeOption,0); > > but that is it... > > No CONFIG_ options for anything else? > > Right, it's hard-coded to 1468 (maximum TFTP frame that will fit in a 1500-byte Ethernet frame, due to UDP overhead). By default, TFTP requests a blocksize that will fill the frame. If not, it uses the default TFTP block size (512, I think).
Is this not good enough? Ben _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
