[coreboot] BayTrail PCIe problems (hangup) in FSP (in U-Boot)

[Wolfgang Denk]

Hallo Zoran,

In message <CAGAf8LzBUfqdWN74Kh3SGdSOPiLa4GUKT+Gr-kEN_A9NQShnZQ at mail.gmail.com> you wrote:
> 
> Let us involve in this discussion Mr Denk (father of U-Boot, I know Mr Denk
> personally)), and Mr Glass (option [B] here mentioned below)... For the
> (targeted by me) purposes (History involved)!

You drop me here into some thread, and even though you write
"History involved", your quoting style does not really make clear
who i writing what in response to which statements by whom :-(

Read: I don't know what you want.


> > peter at stuge.se writes:
> > I think you are actively hurting the overall ecosystem by working on a
> different
> > project (FSP in U-Boot) which overlaps with Coreboot efforts.
> 
> Peter (Stuge),
> 
> This is VERY correct statement... You already mentioned: It is NOT INTEL
> FSP, per say?

I don't understand either of this.  Multiple implementations of the
same feature / multiple solutions for the same problem have never
been a bad thing per se.  On contrary, in masy cases they have been
an essential requisite to enable technical progress.  Of course, it
is always possible to step on someone's toes, but I am not sure
above statement is a result of this.

So without deeper understanding I disagree with both statemen't -
with Peter's, as different projects for the same thing are not
necessarily bad, and with your's that this was true.

> It is something I am fighting for years for/in the STRONG interests of
> U-Boot/Open Source: to have consistent strategy with INTEL IOTG management
> which they ignored/have dominant/aggressive strategy to walk over the Open
> Source people, people at all (please, INTEL Legal, try to oppose me.. Be my
> guests, make my day, I know U R watching)?!

No Intel address is on Cc: - so who do you suspect to be reporting
to Intel legal?

> *> peter at stuge.se <peter at stuge.se> writes:*
> 
> *> The only thing that makes sense is for U-Boot to focus on being a
> payload that is started by coreboot (this has already been done) and for
> your issues to be solved within the coreboot frame.*

I can imagine a bunch of other scenarios which use vanilla U-Boot
without coreboot at all.  I can see no technical reason why x86 must
be different from all other architectures where U-Boot boots
directly.

> Peter (Stuge),
> 
> Although I DO 100% agree with you what you did write (about U-Boot
> politics) in your very first email about DENX Systems (surprising, isn't
> it), with the *last statement* presented here do NOT agree at all!?
> 
> This is a (mild per say denial) noise, my dear friend. "BS" (sorry)... To
> start Coreboot FSP and then to have U-Boot payload as third stage boot
> loader???
> 
> GOOGLE would like to have this as concept, don't you agree (huge
> controlling interests involved)?
> 
> NOPE! NO GO. Please. Please?! ;-)
> 
> Peter...

Zoran - It is totally impossible here to tell who wrote wich part of
this.  From your context, I would guess this was Peter, but from the
working it looks more like yourself.

Please do yourself and all of us the favour and use clean,
unmistablable quoting, so it is definitely clear who wrote what.

Otherwise you are just feeding sparks of a potential flame war by
(mis-) attributing text.

> > On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 4:32 AM, Alexander Couzens <lynxis at fe80.eu> wrote:
> > Do you tried to use coreboot (w/o FSP) + u-boot instead? Or is this out
> of scope?
> 
> This is complete nonsense, and you all know it... Forced by INTEL to
> protect their own interests, in very cruel/selfich way! NO GO! Please!

I don't think this is the way to further a constructive discussion.

> I did NOT want to offend anybody in this list (if anybody, after all, feels
> offended), At The End of The Day, I do NOT care... But you all should think
> what I really wrote here...

So, you use a flame thrower, and then you don't care?  Such
behaviour is usually called trolling...


Thanks, but no.

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,      Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
"Once they go up, who cares where  they  come  down?  That's  not  my
department."                                       - Werner von Braun