Re: [PATCH 00/11] Add support for SUNIV and F1C100s.

Jesse Taube
2022-01-05T12:55:10Z

On 1/5/22 07:14, Andre Przywara wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Jan 2022 19:36:29 +0800
> Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@aosc.io> wrote:
>
> Hi Jesse,
>
>> 在 2022-01-04星期二的 19:34 -0500，Jesse Taube写道：
>>> This patch set aims to add suport for the SUNIV and F1C100s.
>>> Suport has been in linux for a while now, but not in u-boot.
>>>
>>> This patchset contains:
>>> - CPU specific initialization code
>>> - SUNIV dram driver
>>> - SUNIV clock driver adaption
>>> - SUNIV gpio driver adaption
>>> - SUNIV uart driver adaption
>>> - F1C100s basic support
>>>
>>> I am hoping to get Icenowy's patches in as it seems she hasnt
>>> submitted
>>> in a while. The only edits I made to her code is rebasing it against
>>> ML
>>> and changing some formating. I also re-grouped her commits.
>>
>> I got too lazy to send it (because I think F1C100s is just too weak)...
>>
>>>
>>> I am wondering if the dram driver should be moved into device drivers
>>> rather than in mach-sunxi.
>>> I am also wondering if it is okay to submit some one elses code,
>>> and if so how should I do so.
>>
>> As you are keeping my SoB and adding yours, it's totally okay.
>
> Thanks Icenowy for confirming!
>
> Jesse: yes, it's perfectly fine to send patches from someone else, as
> long as you keep the authorship, their SoB, and add your's.
> Typical reasons are lack of time or interest from the original author.
>
> But it's customary to ask the author first
I did but it must have gotten lost in the cosmos.
, and care should be taken
> when changing patches, as this might not be in the interest of the
> original author (and they are the ones who will get blamed for bugs).
> Also please mark the series either as a Resend or as a v2.
>
> So with Icenowy's confirmation above I consider this fine.
>
> But what was actually holding back this series was lack of review,
> testing and/or interest.
Well the price of the SOC has gained it some popularity, aswell as a
couple forum posts.
> Similar to Icenowy my personal interest in
> crufty old cores is somewhat limited, so this wasn't very high on my
> priority list.
It is very slow but its a good challenge.
>
> So given that there is apparently some interest now:
> Can you confirm that you have reviewed the series, or at least tested
> this?
I have tested this yes.
I would be interested to know if a second pair of eyes had a
> look, and to what extent.
I'm Sending giulio.benetti@ some boards I made he will also test. I'm
sure many other people will be willing to test aswell.
> I don't have any hardware, so would need to
> rely on others to make sure this code is somewhat sane.
I can send you one of my many boards :)
> And it basically looks like a v2 of Icenowy's series, so can you give a
> Changelog of the differences? I skimmed over her original series back
> then, so I would be interested in what makes this version special.
It passes checkpatch on the latest.
>
> Cheers,
> Andre
>
>> Thanks for cleaning up these patches! ;-)
NP!

I took https://github.com/Lichee-Pi/u-boot/tree/nano-v2018.01
re-based it against mainline and fixed formatting in a few files.
I also removed the spi-flash driver as it was causing issues and we can
boot from sdcard for now. there are some things I did to make the old
code compatible with new code but mostly preprocessor and configs.

For the dram driver I had to change a bit but none of the logic, i am
worried that i may have to move it to /drivers.

Do you want a more comprehensive list of changes?