On Sun, 2014-09-28 at 20:10 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > On 09/28/2014 06:20 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Sun, 2014-09-28 at 17:40 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> >> Before you do that, note that I've just added 2 patches there, which I > >> would > >> like to get into v2014.10. Specifically I'm hoping that I can get some > >> positive testing feedback on the bananapi gmac patch I've send (off-list), > >> and I believe we really should try to get the bananapi fix into v2014.10, > >> and if we're going todo a pull-req for v2014.10, we might as well include > >> the 2 patches I've just added to next. Do you agree ? > > > > You mean these two? > > sun7i: Add support for Olimex A20-OLinuXino-LIME2 > > mmc: sunxi: add SDHC support for sun6i/sun7i/sun8i > > Yes. > > > The latter seems like a feature to me, or at least the changelog doesn't > > give any rationale why it should go in now rather than waiting for the > > next merge window (i.e. why it's a bugfix, what the upside is to justify > > its inclusion now). How much testing has it had and what are the > > potential downsides? > > AFAIK the downside is that High Capacity cards will not work without it. > > Looking at the code if this bit is set, then for some commands > drivers/mmc/mmc.c or-s in OCR_HCS into the mmc cmdarg, so I guess you're > right that this may cause some undesirable side effects, so lets delay > this one. OK. > > WRT the new board (and new boards generally), I'm in two minds. On the > > one hand they are pretty low risk (can't regress anything else, at least > > not in this case), on the other we are 6 weeks past the close of the > > merge window and 2 from the release date, so we are pretty far along. > > Where do we draw the line? > > Normally I would not include new boards at this moment in the cycle, but > since we need to do a pull-req for the gmac anyways I thought it would > be nice to have it included, esp. since many distros only spin things > like sdcard boot images once, so if we do not include it now, many distros > will not get it for a significant amount of time. There's always Just One More Board(tm) ;-) > Either way let me know how you want to proceed, if you think we should not > include this, then I'll send a pull-req with only the gmac fix. As I say I'm in two minds. I'm not really sure what the u-boot norm is on this, I was hoping someone might chime in (although it's not been very long and the thread topic doesn't exactly scream for attention). Maybe run it by Albert/Tom and see how they feel about such things in general? Where run it by might be two alternate PRs? Or a PR structured so the new board can trivially be dropped? > > The gmac fix is a clear bug fix and once it is properly posted publicly > > I will ack and then I agree it should go in. > > I was hoping for Stephen to get around to testing it today, and then I wanted > to send it out with his Tested-by. I'll just go and send it as is for now. s/Stephen/Karsten/? Ian. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
