print/print_wiki status updates.

[Michael Karcher]

Several cleanups and updates of board URLs and board testing status.

Patches could be merged as you like.

Regards,
  Michael Karcher

[Carl-Daniel Hailfinger]

On 14.03.2010 15:56, Michael Karcher wrote:
> Several cleanups and updates of board URLs and board testing status.
>
> Patches could be merged as you like.

Very nice for this much-needed catchup with reports, thanks!
Patch 2-4 refers to logs with r908/r909. That may be an issue with
TEST_OK_ERASE and TEST_OK_WRITE since a lot of chips changed
locking/write since then. I trust you to have checked that.
May I request that you combine patch 6-9 into one commit that has a
combined changelog? AFAICS those patches are cosmetic and all touch the
same table. This would reduce the work I have to do when backtracking
some changes.
Patch 11... well, if erase is partially broken, do we want
TEST_BAD_ERASE? OTOH, at least one erase function worked. How do we keep
track of that issue? Code FIXME comment?
Patch 15 conflicts with my it87spi autodetect removal (I'd have to
re-add one of the boards to the boards_ok array because they will vanish
from the board_enable array).
Not sure if combining all board adding patches should be combined into
one. Your choice.
It would be awesome if you could convert the pastebin links to mailing
list links by just forwarding the pastebin contents to the list in
separate messages.

You have an ack for all patches except patch 15.
Acked-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger

Regards,
Carl-Daniel

[Michael Karcher]

Am Mittwoch, den 24.03.2010, 04:50 +0100 schrieb Carl-Daniel Hailfinger:
> Patch 2-4 refers to logs with r908/r909. That may be an issue with
> TEST_OK_ERASE and TEST_OK_WRITE since a lot of chips changed
> locking/write since then. I trust you to have checked that.

In fact I didn't check, but we had changes only on
 a) unlocking
 b) FWH-style-command chips

All three patches are about parallel chips (JEDEC commands) that don't
have locking, so that should be OK.
> May I request that you combine patch 6-9 into one commit that has a
> combined changelog? AFAICS those patches are cosmetic and all touch the
> same table. This would reduce the work I have to do when backtracking
> some changes.

OK.
> Patch 11... well, if erase is partially broken, do we want
> TEST_BAD_ERASE? OTOH, at least one erase function worked. How do we keep
> track of that issue? Code FIXME comment?

Untested is enough. We already fixed that erase in r934.
> Patch 15 conflicts with my it87spi autodetect removal (I'd have to
> re-add one of the boards to the boards_ok array because they will vanish
> from the board_enable array).

OK, dropped that patch.
> Not sure if combining all board adding patches should be combined into
> one. Your choice.

Still unsure, too. Maybe join reports by the same author. Should I put a
"thank you" into the commit message? Should it contain just the name or
also the email address?
> It would be awesome if you could convert the pastebin links to mailing
> list links by just forwarding the pastebin contents to the list in
> separate messages.

Forwarded.
> You have an ack for all patches except patch 15.
> Acked-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger

Thanks.

Regards,
  Michael Karcher

[Michael Karcher]

Am Mittwoch, den 24.03.2010, 04:50 +0100 schrieb Carl-Daniel Hailfinger:
> Acked-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger

Committed in r974..r980
Thanks for reviewing!

Regards,
  Michael Karcher