Dear Adrian, In message <20180626093759.24018-1-adrian.ra...@ni.com> you wrote: > From: Joe Hershberger <joe.hershber...@ni.com> > > When using a redundant environment a read error should simply mean to > not use that copy instead of giving up completely. The other copy may > be just fine.
While the general idea is fine, I think we should NOT automatically read data from the backup copy, at least not without clearly letting the user know about this - and such notification should also work in automated scripts or cod calling these routines, so a plain warning message is NOT sufficient. I suggest that the default remains as is: environment read errors cause an error return of this function. But it would probably nice for recovery purposes or such to add an option to switch into some "permissive" mode - here the fall-back to the redundant copy would be permitted, and the return code should indicate what happened (read of primary env copy OK; read failed, but redundant copy could ne read; all read attemtps failed). Thanks! Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de "When anyone says `theoretically,' they really mean `not really.'" - David Parnas _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
