On 25/03/2024 12:32, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
Hi Chanh,
On Tue, 2024-03-19 at 14:21 +0700, Chanh Nguyen wrote:
Add the initial version of the device tree for the Ampere BMC platform, which is equipped with the Aspeed AST2600 BMC SoC.
Signed-off-by: Chanh Nguyen chanh@os.amperecomputing.com
arch/arm/dts/Makefile | 1 + arch/arm/dts/ast2600-ampere.dts | 113 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 114 insertions(+) create mode 100644 arch/arm/dts/ast2600-ampere.dts
diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/Makefile b/arch/arm/dts/Makefile index 37675a3277..3642d59c89 100755 --- a/arch/arm/dts/Makefile +++ b/arch/arm/dts/Makefile @@ -691,6 +691,7 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ASPEED) += \ ast2600-greatlakes.dtb \ ast2600-intel.dtb \ ast2600-ncsi.dtb \
- ast2600-ampere.dtb \ ast2600-p10bmc.dtb \ ast2600-pfr.dtb \ ast2600-qcom-dc-scm-v1.dtb \
Given this hunk and the tags in the `[PATCH]` prefix of the mail subject you've based this change on OpenBMC's fork of u-boot, which is heavily (out of date, and) inspired by Aspeed's SDK tree. I've applied this to OpenBMC's fork for now.
Thank Andrew! I saw my patch on the OpenBMC's fork.
However, you've sent this to the upstream list. You will need to rework your patch on top of mainline u-boot if you want it accepted there, and follow all the usual documentation on how to submit patches to the u- boot project (e.g. you should not be including `u-boot v2019.04-aspeed- openbmc` in the patch subject prefix in upstream submissions).
Andrew
Sorry all! It is my mistake. I just want to send this to OpenBMC's fork, but I used the upstream mail list.