[External] Re: New test for patches in openbmc/openbmc

[Ed Tanous]

On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 4:06 AM Lei Yu <yulei.sh at bytedance.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 6:29 PM Thang Nguyen
> <thang at amperemail.onmicrosoft.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Ed,
> > I have 2 questions on this topics:
> > 1. I have a patch
> > meta-ampere/meta-jade/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot-aspeed/0003-aspeed-support-passing-system-reset-status-to-kernel.patch
> > which ported from Intel code. It is to add BMC reset cause to boot
> > command line (/proc/cmdline) in which I can check for chassis power
> > policy which skip when BMC reboots (does not change CPU status). As the
> > patch is from Intel, what is the procedure to make it reviewed and
> > applied to u-boot?
> >
>
> I have a similar case.
> As an x86 system, some of the recipes/changes are referenced from
> Intel-BMC, which is not upstreamed.
> Currently, we had patches related to UART routing and
> phosphor-node-manager-proxy.
> The UART routing patches are being upstreamed thanks to Troy.
> The change to node-manager is related to the HW design difference, and
> due to the fact that phosphor-node-manager-proxy is in Intel-BMC, we
> can not really make the patch upstream.

I'm not following why that's preventing upstreaming.  If
node-manager-proxy is something you need on your systems, I don't see
a reason why we would avoid cleaning it up and upstreaming it, but I
have no details on what this patch is, or what it does, so it's really
hard to talk in concrete terms about how to proceed next.

>
> How do we handle such cases?
>
> --
> BRs,
> Lei YU