Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 0/2] spl: MMC U-Boot image load from raw partition
On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 09:27:20PM +0100, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: Hello Paul, On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 23:16:09 +0100, Paul Kocialkowski cont...@paulk.fr wrote: [snip] Well I think it makes sense to not call this dead code as long as it *can be* enabled and used on another supported board (for that matter, any OMAP3+ board will indeed do). If no board is calling this code right now, that is because none needs it. If none needs it, then it has no reason to be added. The day some board needs this code, the patch to add this code can be submitted along with the patch that calls this code. This is very different from e.g. the regulator code that I submitted, which is only relevant for devices with that particular piece of hardware (so far, none supported by U-Boot). So it makes sense to submit that regulator patch only along with support for a board that uses it. I don't see the difference. But this is where I see a difference, tomorrow. Setting this, or not setting this new behavior is a Kconfig choice (in Kconfig-speak). We do not need a defconfig in-tree for every single possible choice since at some point we'll do like other Kconfig-based projects and have randconfig builds possible to cover odd choices, along with allyesconfig and allnoconfig to cover the things which people clearly need _somewhere_ (and feel the (good!) need to post them in public to help others) but may not be able to post the whole board port (not the case here per-se but see the various RTC drivers that get posted from time to time). -- Tom signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 0/2] spl: MMC U-Boot image load from raw partition
Hello Tom, On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 08:52:37 -0500, Tom Rini tr...@ti.com wrote: On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 09:27:20PM +0100, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: Hello Paul, On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 23:16:09 +0100, Paul Kocialkowski cont...@paulk.fr wrote: [snip] Well I think it makes sense to not call this dead code as long as it *can be* enabled and used on another supported board (for that matter, any OMAP3+ board will indeed do). If no board is calling this code right now, that is because none needs it. If none needs it, then it has no reason to be added. The day some board needs this code, the patch to add this code can be submitted along with the patch that calls this code. This is very different from e.g. the regulator code that I submitted, which is only relevant for devices with that particular piece of hardware (so far, none supported by U-Boot). So it makes sense to submit that regulator patch only along with support for a board that uses it. I don't see the difference. But this is where I see a difference, tomorrow. Setting this, or not setting this new behavior is a Kconfig choice (in Kconfig-speak). We do not need a defconfig in-tree for every single possible choice since at some point we'll do like other Kconfig-based projects and have randconfig builds possible to cover odd choices, along with allyesconfig and allnoconfig to cover the things which people clearly need _somewhere_ (and feel the (good!) need to post them in public to help others) but may not be able to post the whole board port (not the case here per-se but see the various RTC drivers that get posted from time to time). I still don't agree, as a Kconfig option is no different from any other addition, so I consider that we should only introduce a Kconfig choice because/when it is needed, not just because it could be needed; but you're the boss. -- Tom Amicalement, -- Albert. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 0/2] spl: MMC U-Boot image load from raw partition
Hello Paul, On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 23:16:09 +0100, Paul Kocialkowski cont...@paulk.fr wrote: Le jeudi 13 novembre 2014 à 12:16 +0100, Albert ARIBAUD a écrit : Hello Tom, On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 13:46:09 -0500, Tom Rini tr...@ti.com wrote: On Sat, Nov 08, 2014 at 11:19:23PM +0100, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: Hello Paul, On Sat, 8 Nov 2014 23:14:54 +0100, Paul Kocialkowski cont...@paulk.fr wrote: This is a first attempt at adding support for U-Boot image load from raw partitions. It does not support OS boot as I cannot test it on my current setup. This is going to be useful for the Optimus Black port (please do not consider this as dead code because no board is using it right now, there will be one soon)! Well... Why don't you just post these two patches a little later, as part of the upcoming series which will add support for the Optimus Black? So to me the dead code thing is starting to get a lot more ambiguous since with Kconfig we'll need need every single possible choice enabled in some defconfig, just some way to turn it on, on a possibly relevant board. In this case, any OMAP3+ board would be a fine place to try this out, IFF it's done as a Kconfig choice. Not sure I'm understanding you right, but it seems to me we're in sync: as long as the code is enabled somewhere on some target, it is not dead code. I'm precisely asking that the code here be submitted along with the target that uses it. Or did I miss something? Well I think it makes sense to not call this dead code as long as it *can be* enabled and used on another supported board (for that matter, any OMAP3+ board will indeed do). If no board is calling this code right now, that is because none needs it. If none needs it, then it has no reason to be added. The day some board needs this code, the patch to add this code can be submitted along with the patch that calls this code. This is very different from e.g. the regulator code that I submitted, which is only relevant for devices with that particular piece of hardware (so far, none supported by U-Boot). So it makes sense to submit that regulator patch only along with support for a board that uses it. I don't see the difference. Paul Kocialkowski, Replicant developer Replicant is a fully free Android distribution Website: http://www.replicant.us/ Blog: http://blog.replicant.us/ Wiki/tracker/forums: http://redmine.replicant.us/ Amicalement, -- Albert. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 0/2] spl: MMC U-Boot image load from raw partition
Hello Tom, On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 13:46:09 -0500, Tom Rini tr...@ti.com wrote: On Sat, Nov 08, 2014 at 11:19:23PM +0100, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: Hello Paul, On Sat, 8 Nov 2014 23:14:54 +0100, Paul Kocialkowski cont...@paulk.fr wrote: This is a first attempt at adding support for U-Boot image load from raw partitions. It does not support OS boot as I cannot test it on my current setup. This is going to be useful for the Optimus Black port (please do not consider this as dead code because no board is using it right now, there will be one soon)! Well... Why don't you just post these two patches a little later, as part of the upcoming series which will add support for the Optimus Black? So to me the dead code thing is starting to get a lot more ambiguous since with Kconfig we'll need need every single possible choice enabled in some defconfig, just some way to turn it on, on a possibly relevant board. In this case, any OMAP3+ board would be a fine place to try this out, IFF it's done as a Kconfig choice. Not sure I'm understanding you right, but it seems to me we're in sync: as long as the code is enabled somewhere on some target, it is not dead code. I'm precisely asking that the code here be submitted along with the target that uses it. Or did I miss something? Tom Amicalement, -- Albert. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 0/2] spl: MMC U-Boot image load from raw partition
Le jeudi 13 novembre 2014 à 12:16 +0100, Albert ARIBAUD a écrit : Hello Tom, On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 13:46:09 -0500, Tom Rini tr...@ti.com wrote: On Sat, Nov 08, 2014 at 11:19:23PM +0100, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: Hello Paul, On Sat, 8 Nov 2014 23:14:54 +0100, Paul Kocialkowski cont...@paulk.fr wrote: This is a first attempt at adding support for U-Boot image load from raw partitions. It does not support OS boot as I cannot test it on my current setup. This is going to be useful for the Optimus Black port (please do not consider this as dead code because no board is using it right now, there will be one soon)! Well... Why don't you just post these two patches a little later, as part of the upcoming series which will add support for the Optimus Black? So to me the dead code thing is starting to get a lot more ambiguous since with Kconfig we'll need need every single possible choice enabled in some defconfig, just some way to turn it on, on a possibly relevant board. In this case, any OMAP3+ board would be a fine place to try this out, IFF it's done as a Kconfig choice. Not sure I'm understanding you right, but it seems to me we're in sync: as long as the code is enabled somewhere on some target, it is not dead code. I'm precisely asking that the code here be submitted along with the target that uses it. Or did I miss something? Well I think it makes sense to not call this dead code as long as it *can be* enabled and used on another supported board (for that matter, any OMAP3+ board will indeed do). This is very different from e.g. the regulator code that I submitted, which is only relevant for devices with that particular piece of hardware (so far, none supported by U-Boot). So it makes sense to submit that regulator patch only along with support for a board that uses it. -- Paul Kocialkowski, Replicant developer Replicant is a fully free Android distribution Website: http://www.replicant.us/ Blog: http://blog.replicant.us/ Wiki/tracker/forums: http://redmine.replicant.us/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 0/2] spl: MMC U-Boot image load from raw partition
On Sat, Nov 08, 2014 at 11:19:23PM +0100, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: Hello Paul, On Sat, 8 Nov 2014 23:14:54 +0100, Paul Kocialkowski cont...@paulk.fr wrote: This is a first attempt at adding support for U-Boot image load from raw partitions. It does not support OS boot as I cannot test it on my current setup. This is going to be useful for the Optimus Black port (please do not consider this as dead code because no board is using it right now, there will be one soon)! Well... Why don't you just post these two patches a little later, as part of the upcoming series which will add support for the Optimus Black? So to me the dead code thing is starting to get a lot more ambiguous since with Kconfig we'll need need every single possible choice enabled in some defconfig, just some way to turn it on, on a possibly relevant board. In this case, any OMAP3+ board would be a fine place to try this out, IFF it's done as a Kconfig choice. -- Tom signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
[U-Boot] [PATCH 0/2] spl: MMC U-Boot image load from raw partition
This is a first attempt at adding support for U-Boot image load from raw partitions. It does not support OS boot as I cannot test it on my current setup. This is going to be useful for the Optimus Black port (please do not consider this as dead code because no board is using it right now, there will be one soon)! On the Optimus Black, the second stage bootloader (U-Boot in our case) is stored on the second partition of the internal EMMC. This patch allows reading from that partition without the need of providing the U-Boot config with a sector address, but with the partition address. It makes sense as there is already code to read partition tables, so it would be a shame to hardcode the sector address while it can be obtained dynamically. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 0/2] spl: MMC U-Boot image load from raw partition
Hello Paul, On Sat, 8 Nov 2014 23:14:54 +0100, Paul Kocialkowski cont...@paulk.fr wrote: This is a first attempt at adding support for U-Boot image load from raw partitions. It does not support OS boot as I cannot test it on my current setup. This is going to be useful for the Optimus Black port (please do not consider this as dead code because no board is using it right now, there will be one soon)! Well... Why don't you just post these two patches a little later, as part of the upcoming series which will add support for the Optimus Black? On the Optimus Black, the second stage bootloader (U-Boot in our case) is stored on the second partition of the internal EMMC. This patch allows reading from that partition without the need of providing the U-Boot config with a sector address, but with the partition address. It makes sense as there is already code to read partition tables, so it would be a shame to hardcode the sector address while it can be obtained dynamically. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot Amicalement, -- Albert. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 0/2] spl: MMC U-Boot image load from raw partition
Le samedi 08 novembre 2014 à 23:19 +0100, Albert ARIBAUD a écrit : Hello Paul, On Sat, 8 Nov 2014 23:14:54 +0100, Paul Kocialkowski cont...@paulk.fr wrote: This is a first attempt at adding support for U-Boot image load from raw partitions. It does not support OS boot as I cannot test it on my current setup. This is going to be useful for the Optimus Black port (please do not consider this as dead code because no board is using it right now, there will be one soon)! Well... Why don't you just post these two patches a little later, as part of the upcoming series which will add support for the Optimus Black? The honest answer here is that I don't think I'll have time to handle having the patches reviewed all at once and that I prefer to do things step by step, week after week (work on the next thing when the previous piece is ready or nearly so). Things are independent enough for this to work. On the Optimus Black, the second stage bootloader (U-Boot in our case) is stored on the second partition of the internal EMMC. This patch allows reading from that partition without the need of providing the U-Boot config with a sector address, but with the partition address. It makes sense as there is already code to read partition tables, so it would be a shame to hardcode the sector address while it can be obtained dynamically. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot Amicalement, signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 0/2] spl: MMC U-Boot image load from raw partition
Hello Paul, On Sat, 08 Nov 2014 23:23:04 +0100, Paul Kocialkowski cont...@paulk.fr wrote: Le samedi 08 novembre 2014 à 23:19 +0100, Albert ARIBAUD a écrit : Hello Paul, On Sat, 8 Nov 2014 23:14:54 +0100, Paul Kocialkowski cont...@paulk.fr wrote: This is a first attempt at adding support for U-Boot image load from raw partitions. It does not support OS boot as I cannot test it on my current setup. This is going to be useful for the Optimus Black port (please do not consider this as dead code because no board is using it right now, there will be one soon)! Well... Why don't you just post these two patches a little later, as part of the upcoming series which will add support for the Optimus Black? The honest answer here is that I don't think I'll have time to handle having the patches reviewed all at once and that I prefer to do things step by step, week after week (work on the next thing when the previous piece is ready or nearly so). Things are independent enough for this to work. My own honest answer in turn is that potential reviewers of your code may not think they'll have time to look at code which they cannot assess because they don't know how it is (going to be) called. If you feel you cannot handle reviews of the whole set all at once, then it seems to me the problem is yours to solve: post the whole series, let the whole review happen, and then just look at the comments for each patch in turn at your own pace. This way you avoid posting dead code *and* you get to handle patch reviews piecewise as you would like. Amicalement, -- Albert. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
