On 25 September 2015 at 22:33, Otavio Salvador <otavio.salva...@ossystems.com.br> wrote: > Hello Jagan, > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Jagan Teki <jt...@openedev.com> wrote: > ... >> "sf protect on off len" then based on the offset and len write the >> protected bits and skips the sectors which are protected by showing >> warning say "protected sectors will not be erased!" [1]" > > What about creating commands doing like this instead? > > "sf protect 000" ---> Write 000 to BP2 BP1 BP0 (do not protect any sector) > "sf protect 001" ---> Write 001 to BP2 BP1 BP0 (protect the last 1/64 sectors) > ... > "sf protect 111" ---> Write 111 to BP2 BP1 BP0" (protect all sectors)
This would rather un-obvious implementation, how can use controls register bits, from user point-of-view flash can be accessed in-terms of offset, size. > > Would this method be acceptable? It much simpler. > > I don't think that the proposed "sf protect on off len" would apply to > the SPI NOR protection layout. No, it would apply any flash-layout not only for SPI-NOR, in fact it is much known and acceptable way of implementation - see cfi flash for example(both in Linux, U-Boot) and same case with SPI-NOR on Linux[1] > > Please advise. [1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/513041/ -- Jagan. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
