[PATCH v4 0/5] board: sl28: target refresh

Michael Walle michael at walle.cc
Sat Oct 23 01:28:11 CEST 2021

Hi Marcel,

Am 2021-10-23 01:09, schrieb Marcel Ziswiler:
> Sorry, I did not want to upset anybody. I probably should have asked
> first before doing this.

You could have said the below in the cover letter. Then
I'd have at least an idea what is going on ;)

> On Sat, 2021-10-23 at 00:52 +0200, Michael Walle wrote:
>> Hi Marcel,
>> Am 2021-10-23 00:19, schrieb Marcel Ziswiler:
>> > From: Marcel Ziswiler <marcel.ziswiler at toradex.com>
>> >
>> >
>> > Note that this re-base is only compile tested.
>> Care to explain what this is? Why are you taking my patchset
>> and make a new version of it and rebasing it on the wrong
>> tree?
> You might have noticed that Stefano has a hard time applying some
> patch sets due to continuing conflicts.
> Therefore in trying to further the binman clean-up [1] were I am just
> about to post a new version as well, I
> took the liberty to re-fresh all the patches my series bases on which
> have not seen any care for more than a
> month. I re-based them on top of Stefano's u-boot-imx/master branch
> which I am very certain is exactly the tree
> stuff needs to be re-based to, not?

This is a layerscape SoC board whose patches usually go through
u-boot-fsl-qoriq. Apart from the one doc fix there should be no
dependency on the u-boot-imx tree. I just took Frieder's doc fix
because my last patch depends on it, (in a sense that it doesn't
apply without it). The imx tree should be fine without the fix,
it's just that the generated doc is messed up for the kontron

I think you don't really need this for your series.

>> Did I miss something?
> Not sure. If you still feel my work is of no help to the community I
> am more than happy to abandon any of it.

Now knowing why you did it, it's fine; its just the wrong


More information about the U-Boot mailing list