Hi Tom, On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 7:50 AM, Tom Rini <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 06:44:53PM -0500, Kim Phillips wrote: >> On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 16:03:20 -0700 >> Simon Glass <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 5:13 PM, Kim Phillips <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > > On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 16:51:20 -0700 >> > > Simon Glass <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > >> > >> I have received a number of off-list comments - please do copy the list >> > >> when >> > >> replying so that everyone can see your comments. >> > > >> > > I don't have time to fully review 45 patches, let alone the subject >> > > matter (e.g., no support for RSA in h/w, eh? ;), but I did notice >> > > some things that bugged me: >> > > >> > > Re: "[PATCH v2 04/45] libfdt: Add fdt_next_subnode() to permit easy >> > > subnode iteration": >> > > >> > > - Where's our libfdt maintainer? libfdt patches should be submitted >> > > to the dtc project first. It appears "[PATCH v2 40/45] libfdt: Add >> > > fdt_find_regions()" also suffers from this problem. >> > >> > The fdt_next_subnode() is a pretty trivial change. I will submit it to >> > the dtc project. >> >> Ideally we'd apply the patch directly from how it was applied to the >> upstream dtc project. > > And importantly, that's how we try and work this area in general. Get > it upstream into dtc, mirror the change. So lets get all of the fdt > related stuff there and pull it back down.
Yes - the major patch was sent back around the same time as the verified boot series, along with an fdtgrep tool. I sent the fdt_next_subnode() patch earlier today. > > -- > Tom _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
