From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751357AbeBWBpB (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Feb 2018 20:45:01 -0500 Received: from mga12.intel.com ([192.55.52.136]:30216 "EHLO mga12.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750916AbeBWBpA (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Feb 2018 20:45:00 -0500 X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.47,381,1515484800"; d="scan'208";a="206287905" Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Update ASPEED entry with details To: Andrew Jeffery , Joel Stanley , Arnd Bergmann , Olof Johansson Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20180222050324.21531-1-joel@jms.id.au> <1519288786.101739.1279390200.1CD3EC51@webmail.messagingengine.com> <23b668f1-ab4b-7ef3-ba1e-f252fbba4d1b@linux.intel.com> <1519344667.1024159.1280347184.36AD3FEC@webmail.messagingengine.com> From: "Wang, Haiyue" Message-ID: Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 09:44:58 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1519344667.1024159.1280347184.36AD3FEC@webmail.messagingengine.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2018-02-23 08:11, Andrew Jeffery wrote: > Hi Haiyue, > > On Thu, 22 Feb 2018, at 19:20, Wang, Haiyue wrote: >> Dear Andrew & Joel, >> >> Since you are ASPEED BMC experts, any time and interest in eSPI code >> review ? I've sent >> >> it before, but no more response. Intel recommends eSPI bus than LPC as I >> know. I just kept >> >> the minimal eSPI code which is approved to work well in our real server >> boards for two more >> >> years. Other part of eSPI driver from ASPEED's SDK  has been removed, >> because ePSI is a new >> >> thing, we only use a small feature set like booting host. >> >> We Intel submit this eSPI patch for openbmc upstreaming, hope for your >> response. :-) >> >> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10166577/ >> > There are some comments against the v1 that you linked to above, is there a v2 on the lists? A long holiday back, will send v2 patch soon. > Separately it's better to ping us by replying to the patch itself and putting us in To/Cc, that way we keep discussions focused on the patch at hand here. Got it. Thanks for your reply. > > Cheers, > > Andrew From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: haiyue.wang@linux.intel.com (Wang, Haiyue) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 09:44:58 +0800 Subject: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Update ASPEED entry with details In-Reply-To: <1519344667.1024159.1280347184.36AD3FEC@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <20180222050324.21531-1-joel@jms.id.au> <1519288786.101739.1279390200.1CD3EC51@webmail.messagingengine.com> <23b668f1-ab4b-7ef3-ba1e-f252fbba4d1b@linux.intel.com> <1519344667.1024159.1280347184.36AD3FEC@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 2018-02-23 08:11, Andrew Jeffery wrote: > Hi Haiyue, > > On Thu, 22 Feb 2018, at 19:20, Wang, Haiyue wrote: >> Dear Andrew & Joel, >> >> Since you are ASPEED BMC experts, any time and interest in eSPI code >> review ? I've sent >> >> it before, but no more response. Intel recommends eSPI bus than LPC as I >> know. I just kept >> >> the minimal eSPI code which is approved to work well in our real server >> boards for two more >> >> years. Other part of eSPI driver from ASPEED's SDK? has been removed, >> because ePSI is a new >> >> thing, we only use a small feature set like booting host. >> >> We Intel submit this eSPI patch for openbmc upstreaming, hope for your >> response. :-) >> >> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10166577/ >> > There are some comments against the v1 that you linked to above, is there a v2 on the lists? A long holiday back, will send v2 patch soon. > Separately it's better to ping us by replying to the patch itself and putting us in To/Cc, that way we keep discussions focused on the patch at hand here. Got it. Thanks for your reply. > > Cheers, > > Andrew