[U-Boot] [PATCH 0/3] ls1012a: fix tftp failure

[Joe Hershberger]

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 7:17 PM, Calvin Johnson <calvin.johnson at nxp.com> wrote:
> Hi York,
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: York Sun
>> Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2017 12:00 AM
>> To: Calvin Johnson <calvin.johnson at nxp.com>; u-boot at lists.denx.de
>> Cc: Anji Jagarlmudi <anji.jagarlmudi at nxp.com>; Joe Hershberger
>> <joe.hershberger at ni.com>; Prabhakar Kushwaha
>> <prabhakar.kushwaha at nxp.com>
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] ls1012a: fix tftp failure
>>
>> On 11/21/2017 10:26 PM, Calvin Johnson wrote:
>> > This patch series fixes bug which fails tftp sometimes
>> > while using the pfe interfaces and also has some code clean up.
>> >
>> >
>> > Calvin Johnson (3):
>> >   drivers: net: pfe_eth: add pfe_rx_done to clear bd after packet
>> >     processing
>> >   drivers: net: pfe_eth: use writel/readl to access hw bds
>> >   drivers: net: pfe_eth: cleanup typos and indent
>> >
>> >  drivers/net/pfe_eth/pfe_driver.c | 126 +++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>> -----------
>> >  drivers/net/pfe_eth/pfe_eth.c    |  13 ++--
>> >  include/pfe_eth/pfe_driver.h     |   1 +
>> >  3 files changed, 82 insertions(+), 58 deletions(-)
>> >
>>
>> Your PFE patch set is not fully reviewed or accepted. If I were you, I
>> would probably send v2 version to include all the changes.
>>
>> It is up to Joe to decide to take a new version, or patches on top of
>> patches.

It's assigned to York in patchwork. would you prefer I take them?


> I can squash all these follow up patches to v2 of the base pfe patch series.
> Yes, it will be better than having these patches on top of it as the base is not yet merged.
>
> Thanks
> Calvin
>