On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 02:47:51PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On 3 December 2013 14:34, Tom Rini <tr...@ti.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 02:24:40PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: > >> Hi Tom, > >> > >> On 2 December 2013 13:27, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: > >> > +Tom > >> > > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > On 2 December 2013 12:02, Mateusz Zalega <m.zal...@samsung.com> wrote: > >> >> On 11/29/13 02:00, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > >> >>> How come 13/13 is missing? > >> >> > >> >> It's not. > >> > > >> > I think it was missing until someone approved it, since it was over > >> > the 100KB limit. > >> > >> What do you think of this series? Do you think it is ready to apply? > > > > I think we're where it needs wider testing now, yes. But given that > > we've stumbled onto another problem or two with the bootm refactoring > > series, I'm really hesitant to pull something else big in for this > > release. Kbuild style Makefiles this time, start DM for v2014.04 is my > > plan currently. > > Sounds reasonable. It's ready to go, hopefully won't need a lot of > care and feeding before then. > > Re bootm I am still not thrilled with the outcome. We flushed out > quite a few cases in dark corners at great expense, but don't have a > lot of automated tests (only the vboot test actually runs bootm I > think). Any ideas on what we should do here?
Well, did you see where Michal's test case was? It looks like that should fail anywhere, not just microblaze. For now, I really just want to get this latest bug fixed. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
