[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 03/14] arm/km: convert mgcoge3un target to km_kirkwood

[Holger Brunck]

On 07/04/2012 11:21 AM, Prafulla Wadaskar wrote:
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Wolfgang Denk [mailto:wd at denx.de]
>> Sent: 03 July 2012 23:31
>> To: Prafulla Wadaskar
>> Cc: Holger Brunck; u-boot at lists.denx.de; Valentin Longchamp
>> Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 03/14] arm/km: convert mgcoge3un
>> target to km_kirkwood
>>
>> Dear Prafulla,
>>
>> In message <F766E4F80769BD478052FB6533FA745D1A2FE3028D at SC-
>> VEXCH4.marvell.com> you wrote:
>>>
>>> Do you think I should pull this patch series, I hope it applies
>> cleanly on the recent master branch.
>>> Please confirm.
>>
>> I have to admit that I neither reviewed the patches in question, nor
>> did I follow the whole thread of communication in this patch series.
>> But the general rule is that if there are no strong argumentents
>> against a patch (like a clear NAK or a specific request for changes)
>> we will apply it.
> 
> Hi Wolfgang,
> This patch series was too old, I was trying to save my effors ;-D
> Finally I pulled these patches and tried to apply, but as I doubted it failed :-(
>  
> Hi Hogler
> 
> I could not apply the said patch series to the latest u-boot-marvell.git master branch
> 
> Pls re-submit it.
> 
> git-am U-Boot-1-9-arm-km-add-board-type-to-boards.cfg.patch
> 
> Applying arm/km: add board type to boards.cfg
> 
> error: patch failed: boards.cfg:138
> error: boards.cfg: patch does not apply
> error: patch failed: include/configs/km_kirkwood.h:42
> error: include/configs/km_kirkwood.h: patch does not apply
> Patch failed at 0001.
> When you have resolved this problem run "git-am --resolved".
> If you would prefer to skip this patch, instead run "git-am --skip"
> 

sorry but now I am completely confused. Here you say you want to apply 01-09
which includes
[PATCH v2 05/14] arm/km: correct init of 88e6352 switch in the reset_phy function
and
[PATCH v2 09/14] arm/km: add support for external switch configuration

this includes basic infrastructure for the managed switch.

In another thread you NAK the whole driver:
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2012-July/127529.html

In a further different thread where I asked if I should provide updates which
apply cleanly you say no there are general updates needed:
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2012-July/127531.html

For me these statements are conflicting.

So can you please state clearly which updates you request from myside for which
patch and which are from your point of view not acceptable and why? Thanks

Regards
Holger