From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Maxime Ripard Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 21:36:23 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 2/5] fastboot: sparse: resync common/image-sparse.c (part 1) In-Reply-To: References: <1465323579-18928-1-git-send-email-srae@broadcom.com> <1465323579-18928-3-git-send-email-srae@broadcom.com> <20160615081853.GP9354@lukather> Message-ID: <20160622193623.GY26668@lukather> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 10:29:39AM -0700, Steve Rae wrote: > On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 1:18 AM, Maxime Ripard > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 11:19:36AM -0700, Steve Rae wrote: > > > This file originally came from upstream code. > > > > > > While retaining the storage abstraction feature, this is the first > > > set of the changes required to resync with the > > > cmd_flash_mmc_sparse_img() > > > in the file > > > aboot.c > > > from > > > https://us.codeaurora.org/cgit/quic/la/kernel/lk/plain/app/aboot/aboot.c?h=LE.BR.1.2.1 > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Steve Rae > > > > Again, please split that in several patches to have one patch > > per-change you're doing. > > > > This is just impossible to review. > > And I think you just reinforced the point: > this code was so far away from the original upstream code that it > is not even recognizable anymore.... I think the only point that was made is that a different bootloader has a different implementation of the same protocol, just like for any other protocol. An implementation relying on a 120 lines switch statement, and a 250 lines functions, that hardcodes the backing storage device. I'm not sure this is such a good inspiration. Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: