From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gary Thomas To: james chen Cc: ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [ECOS] Memory Layout Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 17:48:00 -0000 Message-id: References: <000701c0c932$28f70900$c408aa0a@inc.inventec> X-SW-Source: 2001-04/msg00241.html On 20-Apr-2001 james chen wrote: > Hi, Thomas: >> >> Question: if you are building a custom board and shipping a bundled > application >> with it, why would you _not_ want RedBoot, even in the final product? >> > First, I don't know whether it will cost down the performance or not. None. > > Second, it will require extra flash memory to hold it. There would be this cost, but IMO it's minor, especially when weighed against the flexibility and features which are available. Things like: * Ability to debug code in the field (things _do_ break) * Ability to update code in FLASH - RedBoot, applications, etc * If your target has networking hardware, ability to connect via network to the debug/bootstrap environment. * Flexible & extensible control over the boot-time behaviour * Support for POST and BIST > > Third, I want to replace redboot with my hardware check code in final > product. when power on, it will run code to check hardware, if the hardware > is all OK, then load eCos to RAM from flash memory and run eCos > automatically. it seems RedBoot doesn't support it. This mode of operation is fully supported by RedBoot and already in place on a number of targets.