[U-Boot] [PATCH 0/3] Serial Flash: call spi_flash_free more coherently

[Jagan Teki]

On 10 October 2014 16:53, Valentin Longchamp
<valentin.longchamp at keymile.com> wrote:
> Hello Jagannadha,
>
> On 01/21/2014 11:03 AM, Valentin Longchamp wrote:
>> On 09/17/2013 08:46 AM, Valentin Longchamp wrote:
>>> Some board require spi_flash_free to be called after all the accesses,
>>> in order, for instance, to restore the pin multiplexing configuration in
>>> the case where the SPI pins are multiplexed.
>>>
>>> This patch series tries to enhance this. Patch 1 adds spi_flash_free
>>> calls to env_sf so that the SPI interface is always "cleaned up" after
>>> the env read/writes. Patch 2 adds a 'sf release' command that implicitly
>>> calls spi_flash_free and is thus the pendant of 'sf probe'. Patch 3 uses
>>> the 'sf command' for the km_arm board scripts.
>>>
>>>
>>> Valentin Longchamp (3):
>>>   env_sf: generalize call to spi_flash_free after accesses
>>>   cmd_sf: add 'release' command
>>>   km_arm: call 'sf release' in the newenv and update scripts
>>>
>>>  common/cmd_sf.c             | 13 ++++++++++++-
>>>  common/env_sf.c             | 34 ++++++++++++++++------------------
>>>  include/configs/km/km_arm.h |  6 ++++--
>>>  3 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>>>
>>
>> I have sent this series 4 months ago and while it is according to patchwork
>> under review I have not received any feedback yet.
>>
>> That would be nice if this goes into the next merge window since they have been
>> floating around for 4 months now.
>>
>
> Here I ping again ! I have sent this series more than a year ago and you had
> promised me a off list a review "in a few days" at the beginning of march 2014
> ... but I have seen nothing. The only thing that has happened is that the first
> patch of the series was rejected by you.
>
> I don't mind that the patch was rejected. But this is a required patch for us
> and I want it to be mainlined, because I have to rebase it internally for every
> release. Without the feedback about why it was rejected, I cannot however
> improve it and resubmit it.
>
> Can you please review this series and give me a feedback about it ?

Sorry, for long run. Will give my comments soon.

thanks!
-- 
Jagan.