02:06 <owrt-images-builds> Build [#108](https://buildbot.openwrt.org/images/#/builders/120/builds/108) of `openwrt-23.05_realtek/rtl930x` failed.

02:07 <owrt-images-builds> Build [#110](https://buildbot.openwrt.org/images/#/builders/5/builds/110) of `openwrt-23.05_bmips/bcm63268` failed.

02:14 <owrt-images-builds> Build [#108](https://buildbot.openwrt.org/images/#/builders/65/builds/108) of `openwrt-23.05_ipq806x/chromium` failed.

02:19 <owrt-images-builds> Build [#107](https://buildbot.openwrt.org/images/#/builders/135/builds/107) of `openwrt-23.05_bcm27xx/bcm2711` failed.

07:18 <mrkiko> rmilecki: ping

07:18 <rmilecki> mrkiko: pong

07:18 <mrkiko> dwfreed: oh sorry, I did read your messages only now... but was asking rmilecki a question related to the same topic

07:19 <rmilecki> mrkiko: i see you were asking for U-Boot env example

07:20 <rmilecki> what about https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/u-boot,env.yaml ?

07:20 <rmilecki> does it help?

07:20 <rmilecki> please note that non-standard variable names are not supported :/

07:20 <rmilecki> so only "ethaddr" can be used for reading MAC

07:21 <rmilecki> i was trying to change it but got refused :/

07:21 <rmilecki> [PATCH RFC] dt-bindings: nvmem: u-boot,env: add any-name MAC cells compatible

07:21 <mrkiko> rmilecki: I will surely look at it in a moment - my fault for not checking it earlier. So far I got this one: http://dpaste.com//DJDTCUZRY

07:22 <mrkiko> rmilecki: all the rest work, the -env part doesn't as far as I can tell

07:22 <rmilecki> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231214153620.23998-1-zajec5@gmail.com/T/

07:23 <mrkiko> rmilecki: ok, reading the thread

07:24 <rmilecki> mrkiko: if you want to use "u-boot,env-layout" then you need my latest patches

07:24 <rmilecki> did you backport them?

07:24 <rmilecki> wait, even then it's not a "u-boot,env-layout"

07:24 <rmilecki> but just "u-boot,env"

07:26 <mrkiko> "are these upstream u-boot or vendor u-boots" -> I would answer something like "hey man, do you know how many devices out there use an upstream u-boot"? And that would represent a badattitude on my side:)

07:27 <mrkiko> rmilecki: uh, ok - the dts I took as example usethe wrong form, maybeI need to send a patch to fix them up

07:28 <mrkiko> rmilecki: I mean - try to have a grep for 'u-boot,env-layout'; I find also some references in patches folder and I don't know exactly how to deal with them. Thanks a lot for your help, will ix

07:29 <rmilecki> oh my, where did that u-boot,env-layout get from!!

07:29 <rmilecki> i see it now

07:29 <rmilecki> it's just wrong

07:30 <mrkiko> And I should learn definitely to read the docs when they exist

07:51 <mrkiko> rmilecki: where can I find the patches? I can't see them in yourstaging tree so far

07:54 <rmilecki> [PATCH V2 3/3] nvmem: layouts: add U-Boot env layout

07:54 <rmilecki> https://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg5302627.html

08:06 <mrkiko> rmilecki: sad they didn't accept them

08:07 <rmilecki> the last one? i sent it yestarday

08:07 <rmilecki> i expect it to get accepted

08:07 <mrkiko> rmilecki: I mean - sad they didn't accept your propsed solution with thedifferent names

08:07 <rmilecki> ah, true

08:41 <mrkiko> rmilecki: if I send a patch related to the s/u-boot,env-layout/u-boot,env/g definition, may you have a look?

08:50 <rmilecki> sure

13:30 <T-Bone> just curious, what's the status of the APuP patchset?

21:58 <cmonroe> your justification for it and explanation is excellent though :)

22:39 <hauke> dangole: lol, the use initramfs argument again