Wolfgang Denk wrote: >> Is there any chance that the stuff posted by miaofng will be available >> in u-boot-next? >> > > I'm not really sure. As Wolfgang Grandegger already commented, the > implementation is really heavy for a mere boot loader. Sharing code > with Linux is generally a good thing, but it has to fit, too. I'm not > convinced it fits here. Let's see wht the now following discussion > gives. In any case, this is too green for "next". IMHO it would even > bee too green for "staging" if we had something like this (which we > don't have :-) > > > In fact it's not so heavy, it is not socket can architecture based!!! I copied some of linux socket can based ->driver part<- of codes and added a small wrapped layer(by myself) only because i am too lazy to rewrite the sja1000 driver.
For blocked or unblocked access problem, it does support both. To me, i agree mike's view if i write the sja1000 driver from scratch:) _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
