[U-Boot] [RFC] Is anyone interested IPv6 support for u-boot

[Joe Hershberger]

Hi Chris,

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Chris Packham <judge.packham at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 8:16 AM, Joe Hershberger <joe.hershberger at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Chris,
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:25 PM, Chris Packham <judge.packham at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Here at $dayjob we make embedded network devices (routers & switches).
>> > Because we have an interest in getting people to adopt IPv6 we've added
>> > code
>> > to our local u-boot repository to add basic IPv6 support on our boards.
>> > It's
>> > not a fully conformant IPv6 host implementation but it is enough to be
>> > able
>> > to statically configure an IPv6 address and download images from a v6
>> > capable TFTP server.
>> >
>> > We're trying to be better FLOSS citizens so I'm proposing to my
>> > colleagues
>> > that we put some effort in getting this pushed upstream. The first step
>> > of
>> > which would be to see if anyone wants the feature and is the /net
>> > maintainer
>> > willing to take on this code (not that we intend to dump and run).
>>
>> I'm certainly interested in entertaining any network stack patches,
>> and IPv6 support is certainly useful.
>
>
> OK. I'll try and get started as soon as I get a chance. Might need to get
> some clearance from $overlords to spend work time on it (or $wife to spend
> spare time on it). Should I base the patches on
> git://git.denx.de/u-boot-net.git or the main u-boot.git or something else?

Please base it on the main u-boot.git.

>>
>> > Our existing code is a little too tightly coupled to our out of tree
>> > board
>> > support so I don't have a preliminary patchset to provide. If there is
>> > interest I'll work on porting it from our tree to a vanilla u-boot tree
>> > (we
>> > have a couple of supported eval boards around).
>>
>> Please make sure you have a look at
>> http://www.denx.de/wiki/U-Boot/Patches if you haven't already.  That
>> will make it much easier to accept your patches.  You may also want to
>> use the patman and buildman tools to help you manage your
>> patch-series.
>
>
> Yep will do. Part of the reason I haven't sent what we've got currently is
> that it would be a big amorphous dump of code and I don't want to waste
> peoples time when I should be able to break it up into a series of logical
> commits.


-Joe