From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC9E1C433F5 for ; Mon, 17 Jan 2022 12:01:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4Jcr9P6ZHBz30CQ for ; Mon, 17 Jan 2022 23:01:45 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=jms.id.au header.i=@jms.id.au header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=google header.b=N3cGi53w; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com (client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::d34; helo=mail-io1-xd34.google.com; envelope-from=joel.stan@gmail.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=jms.id.au header.i=@jms.id.au header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=google header.b=N3cGi53w; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail-io1-xd34.google.com (mail-io1-xd34.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d34]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Jcr8c6SZCz2xXX for ; Mon, 17 Jan 2022 23:01:04 +1100 (AEDT) Received: by mail-io1-xd34.google.com with SMTP id w7so16022754ioj.5 for ; Mon, 17 Jan 2022 04:01:03 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=jms.id.au; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=9D1f3Ik1P+igrYa0bbRgKP7Np8w9AXCGSLP+E38kw2I=; b=N3cGi53wpcJzFa4puRh5vDzz5hJoikqqdXMd0GO7cwWCNNGMdSy4B7TXnUD0vYR+E0 tRwBHaE0bQNNTuFsWjkNmzhxPFBRw6hlhXQNhFFMESw3kY07sOGOMHZ67GtT3z6cPzIK +oa5oWIdkcd6erpMq+EqqDPZAamuQnlDCc390= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=9D1f3Ik1P+igrYa0bbRgKP7Np8w9AXCGSLP+E38kw2I=; b=GC9VIQcnrF6/sezDy9SjwrhLhKQ4bd/43vtGfFTjzvVz0VDIODAN8kQRXL5HQlRExZ U/Z2Hmyg1HpbO7S8ozSC6gTu/J6v+YmTbvheV6ygXrX/C2mbg89tTUQbVhFitP7w7RVa KLAt54nXSrGvunzszIdsDKyro8eNRZ+NBth6GFmrim+sN1sYxqReo4tUBedPYqu+QvdW UGm7U25gKCfjO/dXf9yd3ZMGUI0SxsjIwg7ShdQpZznYpkumpFkKL+PyqnMEz+RcDD8j a3S5ZqmBgxddkUru3MteAW3csYGLPux0DbssceAiAbQR6asCVGEBw1rEXwS0VJp7ZAIG Sb6w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533OOvjS7Dhkyw+Pqmvde4f8ugx0GPaYJl2P1CYQu4nSjDCF/LBk hNAI4VcJBWwG7uYNc2/mqRxPBlHGsP7HbOjNRD0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwm1Mrk9kwJ0p8qrzs1En8gdeZCoFcljF6cDe8pisGKxVZSq0E2Rxrgs5sEGV8MNeBGu+rSn3UAwHjpXRJz0aA= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6638:1241:: with SMTP id o1mr1368345jas.137.1642420859528; Mon, 17 Jan 2022 04:00:59 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Joel Stanley Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2022 12:00:46 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Procedure for the send review on u-boot patch To: Patrick Williams Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BeenThere: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Development list for OpenBMC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: OpenBMC Maillist , velumanit@hcl.com, logananth hcl Errors-To: openbmc-bounces+openbmc=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "openbmc" On Mon, 17 Jan 2022 at 06:54, Joel Stanley wrote: > > I think everyone doing AST2400/AST2500 work has been copying from existing > > systems and still pointing to the v2016.07 branch that we have working in the > > tree. > > Where possible I review for this. If there's a way for gerrit to tell > me when a new machine is added I'd enforce it more often. > > I've mentioned on the list before that I'd welcome a change that flips > the default to the new tree. That would require setting > PREFERRED_PROVIDER_u-boot for all existing aspeed 2400/2500 machines > that don't have it set, and then changing meta-aspeed. I've given this a go: https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/q/topic:aspeed-u-boot-default I did some boot tests of yosemitev2 and romulus in qemu and all looked fine. Next step would be to convert the EVB to the new u-boot, and perhaps some of the prominent machines that people use to base their new systems, on so they start on the right track.