From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Wolfgang Denk <wd@denx.de>
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2006 18:17:27 +0100
Subject: [U-Boot-Users]
	=?gb2312?B?tPC4tDogW1UtQm9vdC1Vc2Vyc10gW1BBVENIXSBGaXhlZCBjZmkgZmxhc2g=?=
	=?gb2312?B?IHJlYWQgdWNoYXIgYnVnLiA=?= 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 23 Dec 2006 00:34:18 +0800."
	<2176B872C0407E44887F07CCAA869293832458@zch01exm21.fsl.freescale.net> 
Message-ID: <20061222171728.E3333353BD9@atlas.denx.de>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

In message <2176B872C0407E44887F07CCAA869293832458@zch01exm21.fsl.freescale.net> you wrote:
> 
> Yes, the memcpy() is just a byte copy. But a x16 read can be emulated by
> two x8 read. And in fact, the flash_read_ushort(), flash_read_long() in
> cfi_flash.c are using the same implementation.

But these are supposed to read more than one byte.

> In addition, the original code only reads 8bit, not the full 16bit. My
> patch ensures the full 16bit data are read completely.

I still don't understand why flash_read_uchar() should read more than
one byte? If you need a 16 bit read operation I would expect  you  to
use flash_read_ushort() instead.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
Software Engineering:  Embedded and Realtime Systems,  Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
Save energy:  Drive a smaller shell.