On 26/10/2022 01.42, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > On 18/10/2022 02.43, Peng Fan wrote: >> + Stefano & Fabio >> > >>>>> >>>>> Is there any chance you could make some information on that ROM API >>>>> public so it's possible for outsiders to understand what's going on? >> >> What could only help is to ask the ROM team to see whether they have >> plan to public the ROM API details and when. Otherwise you could only >> read the code to understand how it works. >> >>>> >>>> Could you please try below changes to check whether it fixes your issue? >>> >>> Well, it seems very likely it would, but could you _please_ answer the >>> real question so we as a community has a chance of evaluating whether >>> that's the proper fix or something else entirely is needed. And so that >>> in the future we as a community would have a chance of objecting to >>> including 787f04bb6a in the first place. >> >> You could help reviewing if you have time. > > Don't you see the absurdity of on the one hand saying that the only way > to understand the ROM API is to study the U-Boot side of the code, and > on the other hand asking others to review changes to said code? > > If the API could be understood from merely reading existing U-Boot code, > than that code is by definition perfect and won't need to be changed. > > Now that I know there is a dedicated ROM team, let me rephrase: > > Is there any chance you could reach out to said ROM team and ask if they > could make some information on the API public? > > [The "you" in the previous questions have always meant NXP, not you > personally.]
And here we are, half a year later, and mainline U-Boot is still broken. I'm not gonna offer a tested-by or reviewed-by on that patch you suggested upthread until and unless the ROM API gets documented. Rasmus
