On 09/01/19 22:38, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jan 2019 16:41:40 +0100 Stefano Babic sbabic@denx.de wrote:
Hi Stefan, Lukasz,
On 04/01/19 16:05, Stefan Agner wrote:
Hi Stefano,
On 14.12.2018 14:40, Stefano Babic wrote:
On 14/12/18 14:30, Tom Rini wrote:
On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 02:26:22PM +0100, Stefan Agner wrote:
On 14.12.2018 14:20, Tom Rini wrote: > On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 02:13:46PM +0100, Stefan Agner wrote: >> Hi Tom, >> >> On 08.12.2018 17:48, Lukasz Majewski wrote: >>> Hi Stefan, >>> >>>> From: Stefan Agner stefan.agner@toradex.com >>>> >>>> The current bitmap is a bit larger than necessary, it has a >>>> black border around the Toradex logo. Crop the logo slightly >>>> which safes some space, useful especially on Colibri VFxx. >>> >>> I can confirm that those changes, as well as >>> >>> [PATCH v1] board: toradex: colibri_vf: unset NFS and LOADS/B
You're right, this was slipped away, I pick it now.
>>> [PATCH v1] mtd: nand: raw: allow to disable unneeded ECC >>> layouts [PATCH v1] fs: fat: dynamically allocate memory for >>> temporary buffer
Both of them are outside u-boot-imx, so they will be merged by Scott / Tom.
>> >> I think all of those go directly into your tree? > > I had filed vybird stuff off to Stefano for some, hopefully > correct reason. The FAT change and logo change are me, yes.
I guess the mtd change is rather global...
Ah right. Maybe I gave it to myself? I know I assigned it in patchwork.
Currently board/toradex is not specifically marked to be maintained by Stefano (we also have Tegra boards). But yeah for Vybrid it probably makes sense.
Yes, I saw your patches, I will picked them up after current PR (sent now) will be merged.
This still did not make it. Can it still be considered for the next release?
There is also:
- board: toradex: colibri_vf: unset NFS and LOADS/B
- ARM: vf610: ddrmc: program Dummy DDRBYTE1/2
Applied to u-boot-imx.
- ddr: vybrid: various fixes (patchset)
There is a (slight) conflict with Lukasz's patches regarding DDR calibration. I won't pick Lukasz's for 2019.01,
Ok. No problem. ( The DDR patch series itself: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/cover/1008330/)
There is a topic I would like to check. Stefan introduces with his patches a DDRMC_CR80_MC_INIT_COMPLETE that is still missing in your patches. I solved the conflict (not yet pushed to -next) as :
while (!(readl(&ddrmr->cr[80]) & DDRMC_CR80_MC_INIT_COMPLETE)) udelay(10); writel(DDRMC_CR80_MC_INIT_COMPLETE, &ddrmr->cr[81]);
#ifdef CONFIG_DDRMC_VF610_CALIBRATION ddrmc_calibration(ddrmr); #endif
But I have no idea if DDRMC_CR80_MC_INIT_COMPLETE should be done before the calibration of maybe after. Could you help me ?
and I could solve the conflict in -next branch. IMHO I have no concerns (open points) regarding usage of bit shifting instead of BIT() macro. So I pushed this patchset and I delay Lukasz's to next release.
Ok. Thanks for the update.
Best regards, Stefano