Hello Wolfgang,
You have already replied to the pull request, the pull request was incorrect I'm sorry for that, and the sparc repo has been update since.
I have read all your comments on the SPARC patches I sent (and I totally agree with you) and replied to one or two of them.
I havn't found the time yet to work with u-boot since I sent the 1..8 patches. So my repository is in the same state as when I sent the patches (not the pull request). I'm currently working with other projects that have a strict deadline, but as soon as I can I will continue my u-boot work. I believe cleaning up the mess (coding style), splitting up the patches and make the fixes mentioned on the list will go quite quick we I start working with it.
Best regards, Daniel Hellstrom
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Daniel,
in message 47D63F7B.2090002@gaisler.com you wrote:
Please pull sparc. u-boot-sparc.git master.
I cannot do that, as the commits in your repo don't correspond to the patches that have been posted on the mailing list. THis makes it impossible for me to understand what has been acked or rejected.
- Changes to Common code for SPARC
Added SPARC images reqognition to bootm, added SPARC board information (bdinfo), fixed missleading #error information for CFG_ENV_IS_NOWHERE, SPARc has read 64-bit in Flash CFI driver. common/cmd_bdinfo.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ common/cmd_bootm.c | 2 ++ common/cmd_nvedit.c | 2 +- drivers/mtd/cfi_flash.c | 4 ++++ 4 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
This summary does not really correspond to what I see in your repo, either ?
For example, in your repo I see:
5497218ac3c3 - SPARC: fixed so that bootm recognize SPARC uboot-Images.
This was posted on the mailing list as "[PATCH 1/8] SPARC:bootm SPARC support".
b38bc5de9ef4 - SPARC: flash_read64 now calls __raw_readq for SPARC.
This was posted on the mailing list as "[PATCH 2/8] SPARC: SPARC cfi-flash support for 64-bit reads". I sent a review comment to this patch, which you did not follow up, and you didn't fix the code either.Sorry, this is not the way things are supposed to work.
And by the way: you must noch check in this patch yourself. You gotta run this through the CFI custodian.etc. etc.
I don't have the time to clean up this mess. Sorry, but please follow up the feedback to your patches on the mailing list first, get them through the other custodians where needed, and then reset your repository so it matches the (cleaned up) patches on the mailing list.
Sorry.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk