Hi Wolfgang, 2010/8/13 Wolfgang Denk <w...@denx.de>: > Dear Remy Bohmer, > > Well, if your argument is true that the current code can easily be > kept in sync with Linux, then why is it already 8 kernel releases old?
Because it lives already for a real long time in the u-boot-usb tree with no requests on the ML about this subject. Nobody ever showed interest on the ML, so that did not convince me to put any effort in it to push it further. (Why put a lot of time in something if nobody wants it?) Recently there finally seems to be interest, so now it is time to do something useful with it. > How about syncing it with Linux, before adding it to U-Boot? Can be done, but first collect the review comments to figure out how much time it will take to make it U-boot suitable and find out if we need to fork anyway... From functional point of view I see no reason yet to upgrade. >> >> Yep, if that happens things are really broken... >> > >> > So broken that you cannot get back to the command line interpreter? >> > Really? >> >> If malloc is broken, I consider that reason enough for hang/reboot... > > That's not a good idea. Please fix. Fix what? If runtime a condition is detected that should _never_ _ever_ happen (like malloc does not work properly for some reason), which would even make Linux OOPS or panic may not result in a hang() on U-boot? In that case I can remove the hang() and consider if it never happened. Maybe even the code will reach the prompt, but there will be no guarantees... I personally consider that worse compared to tell the user that something serious has gone wrong... Kind regards, Remy _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
