Skip to content

mtd/sf: Various fixes

Tom Rini u-boot 1 version New

Get series with b4
b4 am 20181209133633.GC8702@bill-the-cat

Versions newest first

  1. v4 Latest0 of 11 patches 0 repliesNew

Patches in v4 No applies recorded yet

None of the 11 patches the cover letter announces are in this archive.

Reviews trailers per patch

No Reviewed-by, Acked-by or Tested-by trailers for v4 yet.

Read the v4 thread

Cover letter [U-Boot] [PATCH v4 00/11] mtd/sf: Various fixes
Quoted 37 lines · Boris Brezillon

+Tom for the question about missing SoBs.

Hi Jagan,

Quoted 30 lines · On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 00:48:47 +0530 Jagan Teki <[email protected]> wrote:
Quoted 27 lines · Boris Brezillon

Hello,

This is the 4th version of the mtd / sf fixes patchset. This v4 just adds a new check in del_mtd_device() (and a debug() when del_mtd_partitions() fails).

Regards,

Boris

P.S.: travis-ci results =>

      https://travis-ci.org/bbrezillon/u-boot/builds/461943011

Boris Brezillon (11):
mtd: Add a function to report when the MTD dev list has been updated
mtd: Parse mtdparts/mtdids again when the MTD list has been updated
mtd: Delete partitions attached to the device when a device is deleted
mtd: sf: Make sure we don't register the same device twice
mtd: Use get_mtdids() instead of env_get("mtdids") in
mtd_search_alternate_name()
mtd: Be more strict on the "mtdparts=" prefix check
mtd: Make sure the name passed in mtdparts fits in mtd_name[]
mtd: Make sure we don't parse MTD partitions belonging to another dev
mtd: Don't stop MTD partition creation when it fails on one device
mtd: sf: Unregister the MTD device prior to removing the spi_flash obj
mtd: sf: Make sf_mtd.c more robust

Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 1 line

Applied to u-boot-spi/master

I see that those patches have been merged in mainline, which is great. Just have one question: looks like your SoB is missing while you're clearly reported as the committer. Since I found the same problem on 2614a208471e ("common: command: tempory buffer should have size of command line buf"), I wanted to know if this is a common practice in u-boot to not add SoBs when maintainers apply patches to their tree?

So yes (and I should put this into that wiki sections where we do differ from Linux), if you as a custodian aren't making changes to a patch when applying it then no, you don't add your own SoB line.

Signature · 8 lines
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20181209/d2119303/attachment.sig>

Read the cover letter in its thread