Am 27.01.2014 12:19, schrieb Alexander Graf:
> On 27.01.2014, at 12:12, Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> wrote:
>> Am 27.01.2014 12:00, schrieb Alexander Graf:
>>> On 27.01.2014, at 11:45, Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> wrote:
>>>> Am 27.01.2014 11:31, schrieb Alexander Graf:
>>>>> On 27.01.2014, at 11:11, Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In particular I am not so happy about you guys hardcoding OMAP4 hacks in
>>>>>> generic code that is being reused by all u-boot-* packages with SPL.
>>>>>
>>>>> Uh - where exactly do we have OMAP4 hacks in generic code?
>>>>
>>>> The bulk of mlo-ext2.patch is in common/spl/spl_mmc.c!
>>>>
>>>> spl_mmc_load_image() is being patched with
>>>> + boot_mode = MMCSD_MODE_FAT; /* Fix OMAP4 boot */
>>>
>>> Where is that an OMAP4 hack? It just sets the boot mode to FAT (which we
>>> reuse for ext2) rather than raw.
>>
>> It affects more than just "MLO". I expect mlo-ext2.patch to only affect
>
> It predates SPL. That's why it's called MLO. It really is supposed to be
> generic.
>
>> TI stuff, not Tegra, ODROID, and whomever comes along. It should really
>> be split in two otherwise, one for configs/omap{3_beagle,4_common}.h and
>> one for common SPL fiddling. Fixing "OMAP4 boot" by touching common code
>> in a patch that is applied to all linked packages is simply not OK.
>
> Yes. They really should be separate patches. I agree. It's just naturally
> grown this way because OMAP4 was the first upstream u-boot we were running
> with ext2 /boot.
>
>>
>> Same for the huge sunxi patch - why can't that live in Contrib:sunxi
>> rather than me having to count my fingers for how that patch was created
>> and what to do with it on update.
>
> IIRC It was an attempt to move towards a single code base :).
Getting sunxi patches into upstream u-boot.git might be a better way
forward? The patch hasn't really shrunk much with the new version. :/
[...]
>>>> It really sucks that it's all a gross local hack that none of you
>>>> upstreamed with proper CONFIG_* guards since 2012.
>>>> My .gnu.hash patch I immediately submitted upstream after verifying that
>>>> u-boot-am335xevm builds without mlo-ext2.patch.
>>>
>>> That one's slightly less controversial too ;).
>>
>> If it's so controversial then why are we carrying it and allowing it to
>> hold up updating our generic U-Boot for, e.g., the rpi_b? :)
>
> I take no rpi support over FAT /boot any time :). But they really shouldn't
> conflict.
I guess most of us prefer one's board(s) working over someone else's
filesystem. :) Once a board works, there's no strong reason to
zypper-update the bootloader.
https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/215263
If you can clean up the patch and restore the build so that we can get
it submitted into Factory, I'll be happy.
Even more so if you could create a u-boot fork on openSUSE GitHub
similar to qemu, so that the next rebase will be less painful.
quilt setup refused to work with our %prep section and I didn't find out
why, thus as mentioned in .changes I sat down manually reworking some of
the .patch files in the editor, which might explain my mood...
Andreas
--
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-arm+unsubscr...@opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-arm+ow...@opensuse.org
