On Saturday, September 15, 2012 12:02:53 AM, Tom Rini wrote: > On 09/14/2012 03:03 PM, Benoît Thébaudeau wrote: > > On Friday, September 14, 2012 10:49:04 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 04:17:09PM +0200, Beno??t Th??baudeau > >> wrote: > >>> Dear Wolfgang Denk, > >>> > >>> On Sunday, September 2, 2012 5:28:09 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > >>>> Dear Beno??t Th??baudeau, > >>>> > >>>> In message > >>>> <1285759492.332736.1342790529256.javamail.r...@advansee.com> you > >>>> wrote: > >>>>> When storage devices contain files larger than the embedded > >>>>> RAM, it > >>>>> is usef> ul to > >>>>> be able to read these files by chunks, e.g. for a software > >>>>> update > >>>>> to the > >>>>> embedded NAND Flash from an external storage device (USB stick, > >>>>> SD > >>>>> card, et> c.). > >>>>> > >>>>> Hence, this patch makes it possible by adding a new FAT API to > >>>>> read > >>>>> files f> rom a > >>>>> given position. > >>>>> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Beno??t Th??baudeau > >>>>> <benoit.thebaud...@advansee.com> > >>>>> Cc: Wolfgang Denk <w...@denx.de> > >>>>> --- > >>>>> Changes for v2: > >>>>> - Patch renumbering because of the new v2 1/8. > >>>>> - Possible code style changes due to the new v2 1/8. > >>>>> - Add missing vairable renaming to fat_write.c. > >>>>> > >>>>> .../fs/fat/fat.c | 88 > >>>>> ++++++++++++++++> ---- > >>>>> .../fs/fat/fat_write.c | 18 ++-- > >>>>> 2 files changed, 80 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) > >>>> > >>>> I don't see any command line interface to actually use this > >>>> code. > >>>> > >>>> How would I put this to use? > >>> > >>> Here is the current "fatload" command line interface: > >>> fatload <interface> <dev[:part]> <addr> <filename> [bytes] > >>> > >>> Do you prefer to change it to: > >>> fatload <interface> <dev[:part]> <addr> <filename> [offset] > >>> [bytes] > >>> > >>> or to have a new dedicated command, or something else? > >> > >> Lets go with: > >> fatload <interface> <dev[:part]> <addr> <filename> [bytes] > >> [offset] > >> and > >> update the long help text to mention both bytes and offset and > >> that > >> offset requires bytes. > > > > OK. Do you want that in an update of this patch or in a separate > > patch? > > New patch to replace this. > > > You're right: Having [bytes] before [offset] will avoid breaking > > the current > > users of this command. However, this has one drawback: fatls first > > has to be > > used to get the file size (with [offset] first, 0 could be easily > > used for > > offset to access [bytes]). Hence, still with [bytes] first, would > > you like to > > have some special bytes value (let's say -1 or any negative value) > > meaning "from > > offset to end of file"? > > Lets go with -1 meaning until end of file since we don't have a good > way > today to determine total filesize.
OK. I took 0 instead of -1 because 0 already had this behavior. Done here: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/184793/ Best regards, Benoît _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot