* Andy Green <[email protected]> [090302 15:21]: > Somebody in the thread at some point said: > | Dear Andy, > | > | Andy Green wrote (ao): > |> Otherwise, they will simply propose people keep using U-Boot and not Qi > |> as their "fix". To the extent we pull some extra current until GSM is > |> turned on, Qi is then compatible with old and new kernels. So it's the > |> best path right now AFAICT. > | > | Would it be too inconvenient to have a 'correct' Qi and a > | 'backwards compatible' Qi?
> It's not inconvenient if it can choose what to do at runtime, based on a > sign from the U-Boot header that the kernel it's going to run can cope > with the right thing. what does this mean when booting from SD? No u-boot header involved there, no? > I'll sort out a patch in the next hours. > -Andy Thanks Klaus 'mrmoku' Kurzmann
