[PATCH 5/8] fdt: Allow the devicetree to come from a bloblist

[Simon Glass]

On Tue, Dec 03, 2024 at 12:45:12PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Tom,
>
> On Sun, 1 Dec 2024 at 09:48, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 01, 2024 at 07:42:33AM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
> > > Standard passage provides for a bloblist to be passed from one firmware
> > > phase to the next. That can be used to pass the devicetree along as well.
> > > Add an option to support this.
> > >
> > > Tests for this will be added as part of the Universal Payload work.
> > >
> > > Note: This is the correct way to deal with bloblist, since it allows
> > > boards to choose whether they want to use the devicetree from there, or
> > > not.
> > >
> > > Link: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/20231226094625.221671-1-sjg@chromium.org/
> > > Link: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/20231228133654.2356023-1-sjg@chromium.org/
> > > Link: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/20231228194725.2482268-1-sjg@chromium.org/
> > > Link: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/20240104014919.413568-1-sjg@chromium.org/
> > > Link: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/20230921015730.1511373-31-sjg@chromium.org/
> > > Link: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/20230830180524.315916-31-sjg@chromium.org/
> >
> > You should
> > %s#https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch#https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot
> > all of these Links, aside from shorter, it's on much more broadly
> > distributed infrastructure. And this is a general comment as well.
> >
> > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>
> > > ---
> > >
> > >  common/bloblist.c                  |  1 +
> > >  doc/develop/devicetree/control.rst |  3 ++
> > >  dts/Kconfig                        |  8 ++++++
> > >  include/fdtdec.h                   |  3 +-
> > >  lib/fdtdec.c                       | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> > >  5 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> >
> > The rest of this, I need to think on.
>
> It sounds like you have thought about this, and come to the conclusion
> that the reverts are not going in. So, for simplicity I'll leave this
> patch as is and make a note to use 'lore' in future. I wonder if there
> is an easy way to convert between lore and patchwork?

Both lore (always) and patchwork (for a while, maybe a year or more
now?) use the message-id in the URL, at the end even.

-- 
Tom

Applied to ci/master, thanks!