On Thursday, March 13, 2014 at 06:31:03 AM, Heiko Schocher wrote: > Hello Marek, > > Am 12.03.2014 12:43, schrieb Marek Vasut: > > On Wednesday, March 12, 2014 at 11:01:19 AM, Heiko Schocher wrote: > >> move the flushing code into an extra function dfu_flush(), > >> so it can be used from other code. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Heiko Schocher<h...@denx.de> > >> Cc: Lukasz Majewski<l.majew...@samsung.com> > >> Cc: Kyungmin Park<kyungmin.p...@samsung.com> > >> Cc: Marek Vasut<ma...@denx.de> > >> --- > >> > >> drivers/dfu/dfu.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------- > >> include/dfu.h | 1 + > >> 2 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/dfu/dfu.c b/drivers/dfu/dfu.c > >> index 56e69fd..193e047 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/dfu/dfu.c > >> +++ b/drivers/dfu/dfu.c > >> @@ -127,6 +127,31 @@ static int dfu_write_buffer_drain(struct dfu_entity > >> *dfu) return ret; > >> > >> } > >> > >> +int dfu_flush(struct dfu_entity *dfu, void *buf, int size, int > >> blk_seq_num) +{ > >> + int ret = 0; > >> + > >> + /* end? */ > > > > What does this comment mean ? I don't understand it ... > > Comes from original code... Thinking about it, it seems better to > let this comment and the below "if" in the dfu_write function... > > >> + if (size == 0) { > > > > You can check this like so: > > > > if (size) > > > > return; > > ... as when moving this "if" back to dfu_write(), this "if" kindly > disappears in the patch 2/3 of this series, as calling dfu_flush() > is only in the new dfuMANIFEST state necessary, which is called at > the end of the dfu transfer, so no need for checking, if end of > size is reached!
OK, this makes sense. Thanks for pointing this out. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot