Subrata Banik has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/31284 )
Change subject: soc/intel/cannonlake: Add required FSP UPD changes for CML ......................................................................
Patch Set 7:
Please don't draw every cosmetic change in FSP UPDs into our devicetrees. It makes things messy and in- compatible.
I don't object to such changes in general. But please ask your FSP team to do such cleanups to all FSP plat- forms in parallel so FSP users don't have to suffer.
CNL code base is there since 2016-17 time if i'm not wrong and we
are in 2019, still making use of CNL code base for adding close possible platforms. Because coreboot touches very less Silicon programming and leave remaining on FSP. Consider the fact that intel FSP has wide range of customer from different OS background since CNL till now, every one not using this coreboot code base and FSP is not ideally "only" written to support coreboot hence expectation is wrong that FSP would consider all coreboot platform change and make an unified FSP header file so that all coming platform going to consume the same. I don't have problem with setting the expectation but just highlighting the reality.
You know what, I don't care. Intel wants FSP in coreboot instead of open-source code. So I'm asking Intel not to make a mess of it. I know that makes your job harder than it should be. The design and development process of FSP are not targeting open-source integration so it's pretty hard not to make a mess. But that's not due to decisions made by the coreboot community, is it?
And more over if you have concern that "your" devicetree is
populated with FSP changes then we can come up with better planning in future and clean up that code.
Well, this change contains unnecessary changes to a core- boot API (`chip.h`) and the mentioned regression in `fsp_ params.c`. I don't see why we'd have to wait for that future?
Anyway we are targeting for common code 2.0 soon FYI.
Will you take advice from the coreboot community for that? Please start a ML discussion if so.
@Nico, i'm requesting you to remove your personal battle between coreboot and FSP and consider your -2, this patch is nowhere eligible for -2, when i'm giving you complete inside and proposing to change the design ASAP. For now we are in middle of product and creating roadblock like this is against good development, do you want to should not push patch into coreboot.org? i think thats your only intention too me. This is going out of control for now.