08:36 <shadow> Tartarus: no, it's just absent from devicetree-rebasing and the "parent" visionfive2 board target (in U-Boot) is now OF_UPSTREAM; previous to OF_UPSTREAM there were some bespoke fdt overrides in the U-Boot starfive visionfive2 board target SPL code which were "just barely enough" to get Mars CM Lite booted even though upstream Linux lacks this devicetree support

08:41 <shadow> for reference I have Mars CM and Mars CM Lite hardware, and intend to send patches upstream to effect this support... eventually. Progress on that is delayed.

08:46 <shadow> i.e. meanwhile I did send patches to enable USB support and was able to focus my attention on 1-2 things at a time, and Mars CM + Mars CM Lite was waiting a donation of Mars CM hardware I did receive. I set some time aside to do this but friends ask to go skiing and ... well, I rather go ski than read schematics and do LKML submission

11:35 <sjg1> calebccff: I just replied to your comments on the EFI-app series. I've already applied it, but I sent a fixup patch

11:37 <sjg1> calebccff: I am around today if there's anything to follow up on. I didn't send emails indicating that I applied the series, but will do so soon

11:41 <calebccff> sjg1: applied it to your fork? Can we get it in shape for upstream instead?

11:42 <calebccff> I noticed you're carrying my efistub RFC as well, it needs a lot of rework to be ready for upstream, i don't want to clash with the EFI app stuff so it would be good to coordinate on that

11:48 <calebccff> sjg1: please don't send me patches that don't apply on u-boot master or next (or clearly describe what other series they depend on) :(

12:04 <sjg1> calebccff: Yes I hope that we can sync all of this up, but it's really up to Tom, not me

12:05 <sjg1> calebccff: Re the patch, patman only sends the branch/base commit in the cover letter. I should change that. I'll send a v2

12:08 <sjg1> calebccff: OK done

12:10 <calebccff> sjg1: not that we should get into it, but i have no reason to believe EFI app or EFI stub support wouldn't be accepted upstream, once the code is in good enough shape

12:12 <sjg1> calebccff: The code is fine as a starting point and I have been building on it without any issues. The two series already were over 100 patches so it just doesn't make sense to try to keep polishing it out-of-tree

12:12 <sjg1> calebccff: We don't do 'perfection' thing for normal boards. We accept a series which enables just the UART and boots to a prompt

12:14 <calebccff> sjg1: im sure my efi stub series could get it with just a few revisions. it also doesn't need "over 100 patches"??

12:17 <calebccff> sjg1: more importantly, i don't get paid to review patches which aren't getting pulled into upstream (read: source.denx.de/u-boot/u-boot), and i find it incredibly disingenuous of you to send patches to my inbox which only apply to your increasingly divergent fork

12:17 <sjg1> calebccff: Right, your EFI stub series is pretty small. I haven't counted the EFI patches in my tree, but it must be around 100

12:18 <calebccff> i have a bunch of crap in https://git.codelinaro.org/linaro/qcomlt/u-boot/-/commits/caleb/rbx-integration/ but i wouldn't send patches to the list which only apply on that branch

12:19 <sjg1> calebccff: I don't get paid to review patches at all, nor to write them :-) I thought you would be happy with a follow-up patch, given you took the trouble to review the code

12:20 <sjg1> calebccff: I wouldn't characterise my patches as crap, though. If they didn't have efi: on the front, that would likely have gone in by now

12:20 <sjg1> calebccff: I always work very hard on the quality of my patches and I believe you should be able to see that from the U-Boot tree today

12:22 <calebccff> sjg1: no i wasn't calling your patches crap lol, some of the ones in my branch though...

12:23 <calebccff> sjg1: I was under the impression (until about halfway through when i tried actually applying your series) that it would actually apply, it doesn't

12:24 <calebccff> sjg1: so i have 29 patches in my inbox with no indication that they only apply to YOUR fork of u-boot

12:25 <calebccff> sjg1: can you not imagine that would frustrate me a little bit?

13:55 <Tartarus> shadow: Thanks, I'll take it then, I just wanted to know if I would then need to revert it in -next for example because the platform is there.