From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5612 invoked by alias); 23 Feb 2011 08:50:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 5602 invoked by uid 22791); 23 Feb 2011 08:50:19 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (HELO mtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com) (81.103.221.49) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 08:50:12 +0000 Received: from aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.35]) by mtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (InterMail vM.7.08.04.00 201-2186-134-20080326) with ESMTP id <20110223085009.NEMW23441.mtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com>; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 08:50:09 +0000 Received: from cog.dallaway.org.uk ([213.106.80.48]) by aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (InterMail vG.3.00.04.00 201-2196-133-20080908) with ESMTP id <20110223085009.HBZZ28282.aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@cog.dallaway.org.uk>; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 08:50:09 +0000 Received: from cog.dallaway.org.uk (cog.dallaway.org.uk [127.0.0.1]) by cog.dallaway.org.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p1N8o7Sb027240; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 08:50:07 GMT Message-ID: <4D64CA3F.5060801@dallaway.org.uk> Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 08:50:00 -0000 From: John Dallaway User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20101213) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sergei Gavrikov CC: eCos development list Subject: Re: LPC2xxx internal flash driver References: <4D63A876.2020706@dallaway.org.uk> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact ecos-devel-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-devel-owner@ecos.sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-02/txt/msg00008.txt.bz2 Hi Sergei Sergei Gavrikov wrote: > Well, what can I say. I would avoid addition 'flash_arm_lpc2xxx' package > by default for mentioned targets in ecos.db, but, this is my view only. > Perhaps, I missed something and if Andrew is on the list, he can correct > me on the "v1/v2 mix" issue. Thank you for looking into this. It seems that a flash v2 version of the package with dummy block-locking functions would be desirable. Maybe someone in the eCos community will be interested in developing support for LPC2xxx internal flash along these lines. For avoidance of doubt, I will not add the existing package to any LPC2xxx target definitions. John Dallaway eCos maintainer http://www.dallaway.org.uk/john