This is the mail archive of the
ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the eCos project.
RE: TFTP implementation
- From: Gary Thomas <gthomas at ecoscentric dot com>
- To: "Agarwal, Lomesh" <lomesh dot agarwal at intel dot com>
- Cc: eCos Discuss <ecos-discuss at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: 06 Aug 2002 17:41:41 -0600
- Subject: RE: [ECOS] TFTP implementation
- References: <01BDB7EEF8D4D3119D95009027AE999512F6619B@fmsmsx33.fm.intel.com>
Please adjust your email so that it's obvious who wrote what. I can
reply to this only because I know what I wrote.
On Tue, 2002-08-06 at 17:34, Agarwal, Lomesh wrote:
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gary Thomas [mailto:gary@chez-thomas.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2002 4:23 PM
> To: Agarwal, Lomesh
> Cc: eCos Discuss
> Subject: Re: [ECOS] TFTP implementation
>
>
> On Tue, 2002-08-06 at 16:52, Agarwal, Lomesh wrote:
> > I am trying to download binary using RedBoot over tftp. Download works ok
> if
> > file size is less then 16M. As soon as I try to download binary of size >
> > 16M load command never returns.
> > I am using RedBoot 1.24
> > Does anybody know the reason?
>
> Probably because the block number (used to keep track of where in the
> file the data lives) is a [signed] short. I think this would go wrong
> right at the 16M boundary.
> I couldn't find any variable in tftp_client.c
> Can you tell me the name of variable and file name?
It's not in that file - look in tftp.h at the tu_block field.
>
> Does the RFC (1350 v2 is what we used) allow for files that large?
> I looked at the tftp RFC and it doesn't put any restriction on the size of
> the file which can be transferred.
How does it specify the block number? You might try changing that field
to be an unsigned short (that's how it is on my Linux system) and see
what happens.
--
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss