From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754337AbbA1UOQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Jan 2015 15:14:16 -0500 Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz ([195.113.26.193]:54229 "EHLO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754113AbbA1UOH (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Jan 2015 15:14:07 -0500 Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 08:18:40 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: Nicolas Pitre Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux , Pali =?iso-8859-1?Q?Roh=E1r?= , Rob Herring , Will Deacon , Ivaylo Dimitrov , Sebastian Reichel , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: /proc/atags: Export also for DT Message-ID: <20150128071840.GA29927@amd> References: <1403110464-29646-1-git-send-email-pali.rohar@gmail.com> <20150127132127.GA869@amd> <201501271532.25540@pali> <20150127174818.GM26493@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20150127210943.GN26493@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20150127223331.GP26493@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi! > In other words, what prevents someone from creating, say, a custom > minimal Barebox version that sits on top of the existing N900 > bootloader? Wouldn't that provide a much better user experience? Lot of useless work, that would make user experience worse? We have mostly working u-boot on N900. Its there, useful for boot menus, but makes debugging tricky, so we want to keep working with internal bootloader, too. And I have already explained this to you before. Now, would you stop assigning work to other people? Thanks, Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: pavel@ucw.cz (Pavel Machek) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 08:18:40 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: /proc/atags: Export also for DT In-Reply-To: References: <1403110464-29646-1-git-send-email-pali.rohar@gmail.com> <20150127132127.GA869@amd> <201501271532.25540@pali> <20150127174818.GM26493@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20150127210943.GN26493@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20150127223331.GP26493@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <20150128071840.GA29927@amd> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi! > In other words, what prevents someone from creating, say, a custom > minimal Barebox version that sits on top of the existing N900 > bootloader? Wouldn't that provide a much better user experience? Lot of useless work, that would make user experience worse? We have mostly working u-boot on N900. Its there, useful for boot menus, but makes debugging tricky, so we want to keep working with internal bootloader, too. And I have already explained this to you before. Now, would you stop assigning work to other people? Thanks, Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html