On Sat, Feb 15, 2025 at 10:24:50AM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Tom,
> 
> On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 at 08:01, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 15, 2025 at 05:11:45AM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
> > > Hi Tom,
> > >
> > > On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 at 05:06, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Tom,
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 at 06:59, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 06:10:54AM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
> > > > > > Hi Tom,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, 10 Feb 2025 at 07:33, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sun, Feb 09, 2025 at 02:14:54PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The logic of this has become too confusing.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The primary issue with the patch is that U-Boot needs to set up 
> > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > bloblist in the first phase where BLOBLIST is enabled. 
> > > > > > > > Subsequent
> > > > > > > > phases can then use that bloblist.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > But the first phase of U-Boot cannot assume that one exists.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Reverting this commit seems like a better starting point for 
> > > > > > > > getting
> > > > > > > > things working for all use-cases.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Note: The work to tidy this up is apparently underway. For this 
> > > > > > > > series,
> > > > > > > > a revert is the easiest path.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This reverts commit 66131310d8ff1ba228f989b41bd8812f43be41c3.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot/CAPnjgZ3hMHtiH=f5zkxnniofv_-vfryq1gn7qz5hku8wjo8...@mail.gmail.com/
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org>
> > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > (no changes since v1)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >  common/bloblist.c  | 64 
> > > > > > > > ++++++++++++++--------------------------------
> > > > > > > >  include/bloblist.h | 10 --------
> > > > > > > >  2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We aren't reverting this change so if you plan to move this 
> > > > > > > series out of
> > > > > > > your downstream fork you should start from that and stop posting 
> > > > > > > it,
> > > > > > > that just leads to confusion.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Who is 'we', and start from what?
> > > > >
> > > > > We, being the community, in here, the community mainline U-Boot 
> > > > > project
> > > > > tree.
> > > > >
> > > > > > My goal with this series is to have something that actually boots 
> > > > > > on a
> > > > > > real board, so the bloblist changes are needed for that, 
> > > > > > particularly
> > > > > > as the 'vbe' board in the lab tests this on the hardware. I
> > > > > > deliberately put these two patches at the end of the series so you 
> > > > > > can
> > > > > > ignore them if you'd like.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But for now, as I understand it, there are no users of standard
> > > > > > passage in tree, so actually it would be fine to apply them.
> > > > >
> > > > > And you can ignore all the feedback you like for your downstream fork,
> > > > > sure.
> > > > >
> > > > > Part of the feedback in this series already was "Yes, we can clean 
> > > > > this
> > > > > up a bit more if bloblist will do its own thing instead".
> > > >
> > > > So I see that Raymond's patch is a significant rewrite of what is
> > > > there today, with multiple aims and changes. I would rather add my
> > > > revert and start from a cleaner place.
> > >
> > > Also, I forgot to mention that U-Boot doesn't seem to support the
> > > firmware handoff protocol in SPL? If so, could you point me to the
> > > code?
> >
> > Yes, you never implemented handoff between stages in U-Boot via
> > register. That's not a use case for the platforms that don't use U-Boot
> > for SPL.
> 
> If you let me own bloblist, I'll own it, but for now I am staying away.

Would you be working against mainline again, and not breaking standard
passage (as it's been split off) ?

-- 
Tom

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to