Re: [LinuxBIOS] #31: Do proper checking for flash erase for SST FWH parts
#31: Do proper checking for flash erase for SST FWH parts -+-- Reporter: stepan| Owner: stepan Type: defect|Status: closed Priority: minor | Milestone: Enhance the flashrom utility Component: flashrom | Version: v2 Resolution: fixed | Keywords: Dependencies:| Patchstatus: patch has been committed -+-- Changes (by uwe): * patchstatus: patch is ready to be committed = patch has been committed -- Ticket URL: http://tracker.linuxbios.org/trac/LinuxBIOS/ticket/31#comment:7 LinuxBIOS http://www.linuxbios.org/ -- linuxbios mailing list linuxbios@linuxbios.org http://www.linuxbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: [LinuxBIOS] #31: Do proper checking for flash erase for SST FWH parts
#31: Do proper checking for flash erase for SST FWH parts ---+ Reporter: stepan | Owner: stepan Type: defect | Status: assigned Priority: minor | Milestone: Enhance the flashrom utility Component: flashrom| Version: v2 Resolution: |Keywords: Due_close: MM/DD/ | Include_gantt: 0 Dependencies: | Due_assign: MM/DD/ Patchstatus: patch needs review | ---+ Comment (by uwe): Replying to [comment:3 segher]: Every patch needs review, unless it already got it, and then it's either back to the drawing table, or that patch get's checked in :-) Sure, but we need a state which tells us that there is a patch at all (not all tickets have a patch), and in which state it is (has it already been reviewed? does it need more work? is it ready to be comitted?) etc. This is mostly used for the shiny new Patch Queue I created yesterday: http://tracker.linuxbios.org/trac/LinuxBIOS/report/9 (or click View Tickets - Patch Queue) That should make it easier to track which tickets have patches and in which state. Reviewers or people who want to commit patches which have been approved can simply work on the patch queue and make it smaller. If total_size is indeed the size of flash that got erased, it looks good to me. But Stefan himself knows best, he should just go ahead and apply the patch if no one complains soon (like, wait for tomorrow morning or something like that). Add an Acked-by: if it looks good to you. One important part of the sign- off procedure is that we have sort of a group-review, i.e. at least one other developer has to review the patch and give it his/her ACK (the other important part is copyright and authorship tracking, of course). -- Ticket URL: http://tracker.linuxbios.org/trac/LinuxBIOS/ticket/31#comment:4 LinuxBIOS http://www.linuxbios.org/ -- linuxbios mailing list linuxbios@linuxbios.org http://www.openbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: [LinuxBIOS] #31: Do proper checking for flash erase for SST FWH parts
On Mon, Nov 06, 2006 at 12:22:41AM +0100, Peter Stuge wrote: On Sun, Nov 05, 2006 at 11:39:03PM +0100, Uwe Hermann wrote: Well, that's a matter of taste. I have to delete whole _threads_ of duplicated mails all the time, just because I replied to a single mail in that thread. WTF? I'm subscribed, I _already_ get all the emails, why should I be CC'd explicitly all the time? You can configure Mailman to not send you another copy if it sees your subscribed address among the recipients. Aah, much better now :) Thanks, I didn't know about that option. Uwe. -- http://www.hermann-uwe.de | http://www.holsham-traders.de http://www.crazy-hacks.org | http://www.unmaintained-free-software.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature -- linuxbios mailing list linuxbios@linuxbios.org http://www.openbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
[LinuxBIOS] #31: Do proper checking for flash erase for SST FWH parts
#31: Do proper checking for flash erase for SST FWH parts ---+ Reporter: stepan | Owner: stepan Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Enhance the flashrom utility Component: flashrom| Version: v2 Keywords: | Include_gantt: 0 Dependencies: | Due_assign: MM/DD/ Due_close: MM/DD/ | ---+ Instead of checking the first byte only, the whole part is checked now. This will detect any improper erase. The patch removes a FIXME. :-) Signed-off-by: Stefan Reinauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Ticket URL: http://tracker.linuxbios.org/trac/LinuxBIOS/ticket/31 LinuxBIOS http://www.linuxbios.org/ -- linuxbios mailing list linuxbios@linuxbios.org http://www.openbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: [LinuxBIOS] #31: Do proper checking for flash erase for SST FWH parts
#31: Do proper checking for flash erase for SST FWH parts +--- Reporter: stepan | Owner: stepan Type: defect | Status: assigned Priority: minor | Milestone: Enhance the flashrom utility Component: flashrom|Version: v2 Resolution: | Keywords: Include_gantt: 0 | Dependencies: Due_assign: MM/DD/ | Due_close: MM/DD/ +--- Changes (by stepan): * priority: major = minor * status: new = assigned -- Ticket URL: http://tracker.linuxbios.org/trac/LinuxBIOS/ticket/31#comment:1 LinuxBIOS http://www.linuxbios.org/ -- linuxbios mailing list linuxbios@linuxbios.org http://www.openbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: [LinuxBIOS] #31: Do proper checking for flash erase for SST FWH parts
Instead of checking the first byte only, the whole part is checked now. This will detect any improper erase. The patch removes a FIXME. :-) ... and adds one, heh :-) Signed-off-by: Stefan Reinauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] The patch never made it to the mailing list. To review the patch I now have to: 1) Click the link in the trac mail; 2) Find the correct patch in the list, click it; 3) Scroll all the way to the bottom, click download original format; 4) Remember the file name (and see that it has a MIME type of; text/x-diff, whatever that is); 5) Open the file in some editor; 6) Copy all text; 7) Press reply somewhere in the trac page; 8) Paste that patch; 9) Fixup all mangling (insofar as possible) that the HTML textfield did to the whitespace etc.; 10) Type my comments; 11) Click submit; 12) See my mail on the mailinglist and discover it doesn't do mail threading; 13) Clean up the garbage file. While with reviewing a patch on a mailing list I do 1) Hit the reply to all button (so that all interested people will see my comments first thing!); 2) Type my comments. This isn't working too well, even for just *reading* submitted patches I'll have to do steps 1) and 2) now, and close the browser window and return to the mail window; this is a non-linear workflow, while with mail I just go scroll-scroll-scroll-scroll. LinuxBIOS is really low-volume but it already almost takes me longer to keep up with the patch flow than it takes for Linux. Don't take this as a flame, I just need a working working environment :-) Segher -- linuxbios mailing list linuxbios@linuxbios.org http://www.openbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: [LinuxBIOS] #31: Do proper checking for flash erase for SST FWH parts
* Segher Boessenkool [EMAIL PROTECTED] [061105 21:40]: The patch never made it to the mailing list. To review the patch I now have to: I contacted the trac folks for that problem. Attachments should make it into notification mails. Don't take this as a flame, I just need a working working environment :-) Of course not. ;-) There was public discussion on the symposium about which tracker to use, and we all participated, so I am of course glad about your late feedback. Nobody wanted bugzilla nor roundup. Nobody opposed to trac either, so we worked around some problems, and bought us into some others. Patch management on the mailing list just does not work. It never will. Here's the golden open source rule that applies to trac as well: If you want it fixed, send a fix ;-) Stefan -- coresystems GmbH • Brahmsstr. 16 • D-79104 Freiburg i. Br. Tel.: +49 761 7668825 • Fax: +49 761 7664613 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] • http://www.coresystems.de/ -- linuxbios mailing list linuxbios@linuxbios.org http://www.openbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: [LinuxBIOS] #31: Do proper checking for flash erase for SST FWH parts
* Richard Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] [061105 22:03]: Stefan Reinauer wrote: Patch management on the mailing list just does not work. It never will. The Linux Kernel guys seem to think otherwise. 1. There are _lots_ of people hired full time to check no patches get lost. 2. Patches still get lost or stay ignored pretty often. -- coresystems GmbH • Brahmsstr. 16 • D-79104 Freiburg i. Br. Tel.: +49 761 7668825 • Fax: +49 761 7664613 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] • http://www.coresystems.de/ -- linuxbios mailing list linuxbios@linuxbios.org http://www.openbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: [LinuxBIOS] #31: Do proper checking for flash erase for SST FWH parts
#31: Do proper checking for flash erase for SST FWH parts ---+ Reporter: stepan | Owner: stepan Type: defect | Status: assigned Priority: minor | Milestone: Enhance the flashrom utility Component: flashrom| Version: v2 Resolution: |Keywords: Due_close: MM/DD/ | Include_gantt: 0 Dependencies: | Due_assign: MM/DD/ Patchstatus: patch needs review | ---+ Comment (by segher): Every patch needs review, unless it already got it, and then it's either back to the drawing table, or that patch get's checked in :-) If total_size is indeed the size of flash that got erased, it looks good to me. But Stefan himself knows best, he should just go ahead and apply the patch if no one complains soon (like, wait for tomorrow morning or something like that). Segher -- Ticket URL: http://tracker.linuxbios.org/trac/LinuxBIOS/ticket/31#comment:3 LinuxBIOS http://www.linuxbios.org/ -- linuxbios mailing list linuxbios@linuxbios.org http://www.openbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
