[PATCH 0/4] Updates for ClearFog EEPROM

[Joel Johnson]

On 2020-01-20 05:25, Baruch Siach wrote:
> Hi Joel,
> 
> On Sun, Jan 19 2020, Joel Johnson wrote:
>> On 2020-01-19 01:41, Baruch Siach wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jan 19 2020, Joel Johnson wrote:
>>>> On 2020-01-19 00:22, Baruch Siach wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, Jan 19 2020, Joel Johnson wrote:
>>>>>> This set of patches applies on top of
>>>>>> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/cover/1200324/,
>>>>>> based on testing using the static configuration fallback updates 
>>>>>> in a
>>>>>> related patch series.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thank you very much.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'm currently working on an updated series with some significant
>>>>> changes. These include rename of sys_eeprom to tlv_eeprom; move of 
>>>>> TLV
>>>>> parse code to board/solidrun/common/; and support for TLV read in
>>>>> pre-relocation phase. I'll add your fixes where applicable.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I hope to post v2 in the coming week.
>>>>> 
>>>>> baruch
>>>> 
>>>> Sounds good, thanks! I'm also getting ready to shoot out a V2 of my 
>>>> static
>>>> ClearFog Base support which based on prior review I've rebased on 
>>>> your
>>>> run-time config series. If it works for you, I'll go ahead and still 
>>>> send
>>>> that
>>>> out for review, modulo your further changes. Are you expecting the
>>>> TLV/EEPROM
>>>> change updates to be included in time for the current merge window?
>>> 
>>> I hope to have TLV EEPROM ready for v2020.04.
>> 
>> Hmm, I was hoping to have the static config for ClearFog Base merged 
>> in the
>> current merge window, so just to be clear is that what you're 
>> targeting by
>> v2020.04 as well?
> 
> Yes. Code merged in this merge windows will appear in the next release
> which is v2020.04.
> 
> I have just posted the updated series with your fixes squashed in,
> sometimes in a different form (like the non CMD_TLV_EEPROM build fix).

Sounds great, I'll get my static config series updated against your 
updates runtime detection series, and after a few days post the update, 
pending any other comments on the v2 series.

>> With my recent rebasing, I believe I made the changes compatible 
>> between
>> static and runtime configuration, but it's less important what order 
>> they're
>> applied in - i.e. I can rebase again back on master and retain the
>> alignment. Perhaps it would be possible to merge the static changes 
>> and then
>> update the static config entries' help text with a subsequent merge of 
>> your
>> runtime work?
> 
> I'm not sure what you mean hear.
> 
> baruch

Just that if your TLC update wasn't available for the current merge 
window I may want to request merging my static changes first instead of 
the other way around. Since you clarified your schedule and posted the 
updated series, it no longer matters.

Joel