Dear =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Matthias_Wei=DFer?=,

In message <4ae593f3.3030...@arcor.de> you wrote:
>
> In this specific case: I think I would, as there is currently no CAN
> framework available in u-boot.

This just means that your implementation requires a two-step approach.
In step 1, implement the framework.

> 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 :-)


> Yes. I totally agree here. And if there is a chance that there will be a
> CAN framework in u-boot in not to far future I will write my stuff
> against that.

Do both things at once? The effort saved to re-implement your driver
code against the to-be framwork can be thrown at implementing the
framework in a first step ...

> I think I am not deep enough in u-boot that I will be able to write such
> a framework by myself.

That's only a "not yet", believe me :-)

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de
The further the spiritual evolution of  mankind  advances,  the  more
certain  it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not
lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith,
but through striving after rational knowledge.      - Albert Einstein
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Reply via email to