Hi Chris,

sorry for the late reply - I just returned from vacation.

On 04.04.2018 03:31, Chris Packham wrote:
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 4:01 PM, Chris Packham <judge.pack...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,

I've posted a couple of improvements to the in-tree ddr training code
but we've known for a while that u-boot proper is a bit behind
Marvell's code for ddr training. And now I really do have a problem on
my board that is fixed by using Marvell's code.

Yesterday I got hold of patches from Marvell for their "standalone"
mv_ddr code. It's under a tri-license Proprietary/GPL/BSD-3c so I've
exercised my rights under the GPL and made it available on github
https://github.com/cpackham/mv_ddr.git

Actually looks like Marvell have their own official one
https://github.com/MarvellEmbeddedProcessors/mv-ddr-marvell.git so
there's no need for mine. I'll take it down to avoid confusion.

Understood.

This standalone code looks the most u-boot-ish of any code I've gotten
out of Marvell. In fact I suspect it was based on the work that Stefan
did initially.

The question how do I get this upstream I could submit 475 odd patches
preserving the authorship, I could submit one big roll-up of changes.
Neither option is particularly appealing. It would be hard to narrow
down the subset of changes that fixes my particular problem.

Any suggestions on how to proceed?

Are you still interested in porting / pushing those patches into
mainline? I would very much welcome this. And yes, its not easy to
decide, how this should be done. Both options have some drawbacks.
Do you have a preference?

Thanks,
Stefan
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot

Reply via email to