ok, so the deadline's almost up but the discussions of the past two or
so days have basically i think everything that needs to be said, and
i'm extremely grateful to everyone who's contributed, privately and
publicly, especially on such short notice. i've passed it over to my
associates who will
On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 11:09:59PM +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
this is all a rather round-about way to say that for those people who
heard and are thinking of heeding russell's call to be silent and to
ignore me
Okay, so you've just misrepresented me in the above comment. I never
said
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 11:31 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
li...@arm.linux.org.uk wrote:
On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 11:09:59PM +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
this is all a rather round-about way to say that for those people who
heard and are thinking of heeding russell's call to be silent and to
Luke,
On Friday 07 of June 2013 22:29:34 luke.leighton wrote:
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Thomas Petazzoni
thomas.petazz...@free-electrons.com wrote:
Maxime will reply to this in more details, but I believe the status
is:
* Interrupt controller is working.
* Clock drivers are
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 9:28 AM, Tomasz Figa tomasz.f...@gmail.com wrote:
Now that the discussion went off from you stupid kernel developers
*lol*. i get that summary [you said people were stupid!!!] a lot.
i don't quite understand where it comes from, otherwise i would stop
doing it :)
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Vladimir Pantelic vlado...@gmail.com wrote:
4 days? WTF? since when did setting an ultimatum to the kernel
community work?
i was only informed of the opportunity 2 days ago, vladimir. this is
an important meeting. of course the linux kernel community is
luke.leighton wrote:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Vladimir Pantelic vlado...@gmail.com wrote:
4 days? WTF? since when did setting an ultimatum to the kernel
community work?
i was only informed of the opportunity 2 days ago, vladimir. this is
an important meeting. of course the linux
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Tomasz Figa tomasz.f...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday 06 of June 2013 13:49:38 luke.leighton wrote:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Tomasz Figa tomasz.f...@gmail.com
wrote:
Luke,
On Thursday 06 of June 2013 13:24:57 luke.leighton wrote:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
li...@arm.linux.org.uk wrote:
If companies are going to go off and invent the square wheel, and that
makes *them* suffer the loss of being able to merge back into the
mainline kernel, thereby making *their* job of moving forward with
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 8:48 AM, Vladimir Pantelic vlado...@gmail.com wrote:
luke.leighton wrote:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Vladimir Pantelic vlado...@gmail.com
wrote:
4 days? WTF? since when did setting an ultimatum to the kernel
community work?
i was only informed of the
On 07/06/2013 10:06, luke.leighton wrote:
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 8:48 AM, Vladimir Pantelic vlado...@gmail.com wrote:
luke.leighton wrote:
3 days remaining on the clock.
what catastrophic thing will happen when the time runs out?
no catastrophe, vladimir: all that happens is that an
luke.leighton wrote: so.
coming back to what you said earlier: i'm formulating what to say to
allwinner [and need to pre-send something by monday so that they can
consider it before the meeting]. so far, it consists of:
* device-tree is what the linux kernel community has come up with,
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 09:02:43AM +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
ok. so. we come back to the question again: what shall i propose to
them that they consider doing, and what benefit would it be to them to
do so?
i cannot go to them and say you have to do this [insert proposal
here] - it
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 10:40:37AM +0200, Vladimir Pantelic wrote:
luke.leighton wrote: so.
coming back to what you said earlier: i'm formulating what to say to
allwinner [and need to pre-send something by monday so that they can
consider it before the meeting]. so far, it consists
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 09:48:22AM +0200, Vladimir Pantelic wrote:
luke.leighton wrote:
3 days remaining on the clock.
what catastrophic thing will happen when the time runs out?
Maybe the world will explode into tiny small bits? Probably not. I
suspect nothing of any relevance to us.
As
2013/6/7 Olof Johansson o...@lixom.net:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 8:13 AM, jonsm...@gmail.com jonsm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 7:54 PM, luke.leighton luke.leigh...@gmail.com
wrote:
augh. ok. solutions. what are the solutions here?
Luke if you really want to fix this a good
fre 2013-06-07 klockan 09:02 +0100 skrev luke.leighton:
ok. so. we come back to the question again: what shall i propose to
them that they consider doing, and what benefit would it be to them to
do so?
Just tell them that the kernel is moving to a different configuration
syntax called
Tomasz Figa tomasz.f...@gmail.com
writes:
Seeing from your posts you don't have any knowledge on how Linux kernel
development works and even on how Allwinner's cooperation with our
community looks (and seem to be completely closed to our effort of showing
you the reality), so I'm not sure
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 08:52:43AM +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
coming back to what you said earlier: i'm formulating what to say to
allwinner [and need to pre-send something by monday so that they can
consider it before the meeting]. so far, it consists of:
* device-tree is what the linux
SoC vendors are free to join the discussion, and many SoC vendors are part
of the kernel community, so calling this unilateral is plain wrong.
you're free to believe that, vladimir. i've explained why that
hasn't happened, in prior messages. can we move forward, please?
I prefer it if
On 06/07/2013 02:02 AM, luke.leighton wrote:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
li...@arm.linux.org.uk wrote:
If companies are going to go off and invent the square wheel, and that
makes *them* suffer the loss of being able to merge back into the
mainline kernel,
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 9:18 AM, Alexandre Belloni
alexandre.bell...@free-electrons.com wrote:
On 07/06/2013 10:06, luke.leighton wrote:
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 8:48 AM, Vladimir Pantelic vlado...@gmail.com wrote:
luke.leighton wrote:
3 days remaining on the clock.
what catastrophic thing
thomas i _very_ briefly spotted this when i was extremely busy
yesterday, and i'm grateful to the 2 or 3 people who've given me the
keywords and/or links to catch up.
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Thomas Petazzoni
thomas.petazz...@free-electrons.com wrote:
Dear Tomasz Figa,
On Thu, 06 Jun
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 02:49:28PM +, joem wrote:
SoC vendors are free to join the discussion, and many SoC vendors are part
of the kernel community, so calling this unilateral is plain wrong.
you're free to believe that, vladimir. i've explained why that
hasn't happened, in
Luke,
I want only one thing from you at this time. See below.
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 11:45 AM, luke.leighton luke.leigh...@gmail.com wrote:
but the Directors of Allwinner aren't been kept in the loop,
here: that's my job, to get them up-to-speed.
The one job I would love for you to do
Hello,
On Fri, 7 Jun 2013 19:26:49 +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
Have you noticed that it is already the case in mainline?
i knew there was a little bit, but not the extent of the commits.
Then you could probably use a bit of your time to read the kernel
commit logs rather than writing
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Olof Johansson o...@lixom.net wrote:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 8:13 AM, jonsm...@gmail.com jonsm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 7:54 PM, luke.leighton luke.leigh...@gmail.com
wrote:
augh. ok. solutions. what are the solutions here?
Luke if you
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Maxime Ripard
maxime.rip...@free-electrons.com wrote:
I should also add that Allwinner not only talked to us already,
oo! great! can you please [privately, not publicly] let me know who
that is, so i can let the Directors know, so that they can follow up?
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 9:22 PM, Arnd Bergmann a...@arndb.de wrote:
On Thursday 06 June 2013, Maxime Ripard wrote:
So yes, Allwinner has an evil vendor tree (c), with a solution similar yet
inferior (because not generic enough) to the device tree, but they show
interest on going down the
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:26 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
li...@arm.linux.org.uk wrote:
Luke Leighton on the other hand is demanding that we
no demands have been made, russell: i've informed you of an immovable
deadline which will pass beyond which the opportunity being presented
is lost.
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Tomasz Figa tomasz.f...@gmail.com wrote:
Seeing from your posts you don't have any knowledge on how Linux kernel
development works
check back to 2004.
and even on how Allwinner's cooperation with our
community looks (and seem to be completely closed to our
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:54 PM, Olof Johansson o...@lixom.net wrote:
Luke,
I want only one thing from you at this time. See below.
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 11:45 AM, luke.leighton luke.leigh...@gmail.com
wrote:
but the Directors of Allwinner aren't been kept in the loop,
here: that's
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:57 PM, Wookey woo...@wookware.org wrote:
OK, this sounds good. Could you say who the allwinner engineers are?
[cross-over: i asked him if he'd be happy to let me know privately,
so i have at least some context when speaking to the Directors]
I
guess it's quite a
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Thomas Petazzoni
thomas.petazz...@free-electrons.com wrote:
Hello,
On Fri, 7 Jun 2013 19:26:49 +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
Have you noticed that it is already the case in mainline?
i knew there was a little bit, but not the extent of the commits.
Then you
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 08:18:14PM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:26 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
li...@arm.linux.org.uk wrote:
Luke Leighton on the other hand is demanding that we
no demands have been made, russell: i've informed you of an immovable
On Friday 07 of June 2013 20:02:03 luke.leighton wrote:
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Tomasz Figa tomasz.f...@gmail.com
wrote:
Seeing from your posts you don't have any knowledge on how Linux kernel
development works
check back to 2004.
$ git log --oneline --author=Luke Kenneth
+++ Maxime Ripard [2013-06-06 19:28 +0200]:
Hi everyone,
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 09:00:00AM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote:
Listen, Allwinner isn't working in a vacuum, believe it or not. I've
talked to them, so has Arnd and other people working on ARM, including
Maxime Ripard, who's been
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 08:04:26PM +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:54 PM, Olof Johansson o...@lixom.net wrote:
By demanding
a-a-ah, no demands made.
well, tough. get me up to speed, *fast*. please stop wasting time
like this: get me up to speed.
That is a demand.
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 08:02:03PM +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
well, tough. get me up to speed, *fast*.
No, not unless you're willing to *pay* someone to spend time teaching you,
because you are asking to be *taught* about the current situation, so
you're asking someone to do some _work_ _for_
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 08:18:14PM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:26 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
li...@arm.linux.org.uk wrote:
Luke Leighton on the other hand is demanding that we
no demands have been made, russell: i've informed you of an immovable
Confused yes - innocent mistake - 50% yes.
I see now the posts are cc'd from arm-netbook mailing lists to many
other mailing lists with different standards for noise.
Apologies for not seeing that.
arm-netbook list 'belongs' to luke, but generally the noise level
is very low here and its aim is
right - too many people contributed to this, input from jon smirl,
wookie, maxime, tomasz, henrik, i've made a start here and will
continue editing: this is notes for me to put forward an agenda for
discussion:
http://hands.com/~lkcl/allwinner_linux_proposal.txt
i'm setting a rule that each
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 8:35 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
li...@arm.linux.org.uk wrote:
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 08:18:14PM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:26 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
li...@arm.linux.org.uk wrote:
Luke Leighton on the other hand is
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Thomas Petazzoni
thomas.petazz...@free-electrons.com wrote:
Maxime will reply to this in more details, but I believe the status is:
* Interrupt controller is working.
* Clock drivers are working.
* Pinctrl is working.
* GPIO is working.
* Timer is
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 8:30 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
li...@arm.linux.org.uk wrote:
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 08:02:03PM +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
well, tough. get me up to speed, *fast*.
No, not unless you're willing to *pay* someone to spend time teaching you,
there's not enough time.
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 07:26:49PM +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
maxime: we need to talk :)
please tell me in 4 or 5 sentences what you've managed to do so far,
expanding a little on what thomas says below, more specifically what
it achieves and/or allows rather than technically what it does
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 11:08 PM, Maxime Ripard
maxime.rip...@free-electrons.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 07:26:49PM +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
maxime: we need to talk :)
please tell me in 4 or 5 sentences what you've managed to do so far,
expanding a little on what thomas says below,
On Saturday, June 8, 2013, luke.leighton wrote:
right - too many people contributed to this, input from jon smirl,
wookie, maxime, tomasz, henrik, i've made a start here and will
continue editing: this is notes for me to put forward an agenda for
discussion:
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 12:09 AM, Dennis Lan (dlan)
dennis.y...@gmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, June 8, 2013, luke.leighton wrote:
right - too many people contributed to this, input from jon smirl,
wookie, maxime, tomasz, henrik, i've made a start here and will
continue editing: this is notes
Dear Tomasz Figa,
On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 02:01:14 +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
I don't see any other solution here than moving all the Allwinner
code to DT (as it has been suggested in this thread several times
already), as this is the only hardware description method supported
by ARM Linux.
Have
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 02:01:14AM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
I don't see any other solution here than moving all the Allwinner code to
DT (as it has been suggested in this thread several times already), as
this is the only hardware description method supported by ARM Linux.
Well, the server
Hi Thomas,
On Thursday 06 of June 2013 11:27:23 Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
Dear Tomasz Figa,
On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 02:01:14 +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
I don't see any other solution here than moving all the Allwinner
code to DT (as it has been suggested in this thread several times
already),
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:15 AM, Henrik Nordström
hen...@henriknordstrom.net wrote:
conditions. I don't know what you really mean here, only that it's not
target market.
mass-volume tablet, mass-volume IPTV box. android OS, nothing else.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:19 AM, Henrik Nordström
hen...@henriknordstrom.net wrote:
tor 2013-06-06 klockan 00:54 +0100 skrev luke.leighton:
Not really the case. Actually the opposite. DT have this as well, and
integrated in device probing. Allwinner need to hack every driver used
to add
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:01 AM, Tomasz Figa tomasz.f...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't see any other solution here than moving all the Allwinner code to
DT (as it has been suggested in this thread several times already), as
this is the only hardware description method supported by ARM Linux.
i
Luke,
On Thursday 06 of June 2013 13:24:57 luke.leighton wrote:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:01 AM, Tomasz Figa tomasz.f...@gmail.com
wrote:
I don't see any other solution here than moving all the Allwinner code
to DT (as it has been suggested in this thread several times
already), as this is
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Tomasz Figa tomasz.f...@gmail.com wrote:
Luke,
On Thursday 06 of June 2013 13:24:57 luke.leighton wrote:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:01 AM, Tomasz Figa tomasz.f...@gmail.com
wrote:
I don't see any other solution here than moving all the Allwinner code
to DT
luke.leighton wrote:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:19 AM, Henrik Nordström
hen...@henriknordstrom.net wrote:
tor 2013-06-06 klockan 00:54 +0100 skrev luke.leighton:
Not really the case. Actually the opposite. DT have this as well, and
integrated in device probing. Allwinner need to hack every
On Thursday 06 of June 2013 13:49:38 luke.leighton wrote:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Tomasz Figa tomasz.f...@gmail.com
wrote:
Luke,
On Thursday 06 of June 2013 13:24:57 luke.leighton wrote:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:01 AM, Tomasz Figa tomasz.f...@gmail.com
wrote:
I don't see
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 01:24:57PM +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:01 AM, Tomasz Figa tomasz.f...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't see any other solution here than moving all the Allwinner code to
DT (as it has been suggested in this thread several times already), as
this is
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 01:22:04PM +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:19 AM, Henrik Nordström
hen...@henriknordstrom.net wrote:
tor 2013-06-06 klockan 00:54 +0100 skrev luke.leighton:
Not really the case. Actually the opposite. DT have this as well, and
integrated in
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 01:24:57PM +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:01 AM, Tomasz Figa tomasz.f...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't see any other solution here than moving all the Allwinner code to
DT (as it has been suggested in this thread several times already), as
this is
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 7:02 AM, Theodore Ts'o ty...@mit.edu wrote:
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 01:24:57PM +0100, luke.leighton wrote:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:01 AM, Tomasz Figa tomasz.f...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't see any other solution here than moving all the Allwinner code to
DT (as it has
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 7:54 PM, luke.leighton luke.leigh...@gmail.com wrote:
augh. ok. solutions. what are the solutions here?
Luke if you really want to fix this a good solution is to have
Allwinner join Linaro and provide an engineer to the Linaro effort.
That engineer will get educated on
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 8:13 AM, jonsm...@gmail.com jonsm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 7:54 PM, luke.leighton luke.leigh...@gmail.com wrote:
augh. ok. solutions. what are the solutions here?
Luke if you really want to fix this a good solution is to have
Allwinner join Linaro
Hi everyone,
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 09:00:00AM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 8:13 AM, jonsm...@gmail.com jonsm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 7:54 PM, luke.leighton luke.leigh...@gmail.com
wrote:
augh. ok. solutions. what are the solutions here?
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 07:28:10PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
I should also add that Allwinner not only talked to us already, but also
expressed interest in doing actual modern kernel development (like using
recently introduced kernel frameworks, like the clk framework).
I've received
tor 2013-06-06 klockan 13:19 +0100 skrev luke.leighton:
mass-volume tablet, mass-volume IPTV box. android OS, nothing else.
Which still includes a number of possible configurations with different
i2c, spi, usb etc devices connected on the board. Because Allwinner is
not using mainline methods
tor 2013-06-06 klockan 13:22 +0100 skrev luke.leighton:
idea: hook into devicetree gpio functions to allow script-fex gpio
functions to gain access in a separate module? that sort of thing.
No. Drop FEX from the kernel, use DT. There is no reason why the kernel
shold care about the FEX
On Thursday 06 June 2013, Maxime Ripard wrote:
So yes, Allwinner has an evil vendor tree (c), with a solution similar yet
inferior (because not generic enough) to the device tree, but they show
interest on going down the mainline road.
Right, and of course there is nothing special about that,
ons 2013-06-05 klockan 22:24 +0100 skrev Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton:
And Then Some, stephen. there are two versions of u-boot being used:
one is the community-assembled [GPL-compliant] one, and the other
includes a [as-of-a-few-days-ago-but-no-longer, yay!]
formerly-GPL-violating one from
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 10:47 PM, Henrik Nordström
hen...@henriknordstrom.net wrote:
ons 2013-06-05 klockan 22:15 +0100 skrev Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton:
what we do not want to happen is that they see upstream patches being
submitted, they merge them into their internal tree (which to date
ons 2013-06-05 klockan 22:15 +0100 skrev Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton:
what we do not want to happen is that they see upstream patches being
submitted, they merge them into their internal tree (which to date has
had zero upstream changes: they're currently only just getting round
to doing 3.4
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 10:59 PM, Henrik Nordström
hen...@henriknordstrom.net wrote:
and then there's the boot0 and boot1 loaders, these *do* have
no, these are not tiny. boot0 is 24KB to fit the initial embedded SRAM
(not cache), but boot1 is on pair with u-boot in size and runs from
On 06/05/2013 03:59 PM, Henrik Nordström wrote:
ons 2013-06-05 klockan 22:24 +0100 skrev Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton:
...
so the point is: if anyone wishes me to propose to allwinner that
they convert over to devicetree, or any other proposal which involves
significant low-level changes to
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 6:47 PM, luke.leighton luke.leigh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 10:59 PM, Henrik Nordström
hen...@henriknordstrom.net wrote:
and then there's the boot0 and boot1 loaders, these *do* have
no, these are not tiny. boot0 is 24KB to fit the initial
ons 2013-06-05 klockan 16:54 -0600 skrev Stephen Warren:
1) Put all the parameters in the U-Boot configuration header. This is
normal.
Yes, we do so today for U-Boot SPL. But this won't fit very well with
the Allwinner ODM workflow where one binary image works on a wide range
of board
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 12:07 AM, jonsm...@gmail.com jonsm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 6:47 PM, luke.leighton luke.leigh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 10:59 PM, Henrik Nordström
hen...@henriknordstrom.net wrote:
and then there's the boot0 and boot1 loaders,
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 7:26 PM, luke.leighton luke.leigh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 12:07 AM, jonsm...@gmail.com jonsm...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 6:47 PM, luke.leighton luke.leigh...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 10:59 PM, Henrik Nordström
tor 2013-06-06 klockan 00:26 +0100 skrev luke.leighton:
no john - they've only added it to the multiplexed sections of the
drivers which they themselves have written. such as
drivers/usb/sun{N}i_usb/*.[ch], drivers/block/nand/sun{N}_i,
arch/arm/mach-sun{N}i and so on.
And a number of SPI
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 12:40 AM, Henrik Nordström
hen...@henriknordstrom.net wrote:
tor 2013-06-06 klockan 00:26 +0100 skrev luke.leighton:
no john - they've only added it to the multiplexed sections of the
drivers which they themselves have written. such as
drivers/usb/sun{N}i_usb/*.[ch],
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 12:40 AM, jonsm...@gmail.com jonsm...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a Cubieboard and I have a pca9532 on my desk. Now I want to
attach this pca9532 to the Cubieboard so I wire them together on I2C.
How is the Allwinner kernel going to load the driver for the pca9532?
The
On Thursday 06 of June 2013 00:54:02 luke.leighton wrote:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 12:40 AM, Henrik Nordström
hen...@henriknordstrom.net wrote:
tor 2013-06-06 klockan 00:26 +0100 skrev luke.leighton:
no john - they've only added it to the multiplexed sections of the
drivers which they
tor 2013-06-06 klockan 00:52 +0100 skrev luke.leighton:
How is the Allwinner kernel going to load the driver for the pca9532?
The mainline pca9532 driver does not understand fex so it can't read
the necessary initialization data.
jon: you're immediately outside of the target market for
tor 2013-06-06 klockan 00:54 +0100 skrev luke.leighton:
Not really the case. Actually the opposite. DT have this as well, and
integrated in device probing. Allwinner need to hack every driver used
to add their gpio requests to have pinmuxing triggered.
augh. ok. solutions. what are
ons 2013-06-05 klockan 23:20 +0100 skrev luke.leighton:
ok: great. so we have something that i can potentially propose to
them. now: what reason can i give that they should accept this?
what's the biggest incentive for them, here, to make these changes?
what would they gain?
Mainly a
86 matches
Mail list logo
