On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 05:44:24PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
It might be not good to use software defined version to identify sdma
device type, when hardware does not define such version. Instead,
soc name is stable enough to define the device type.
I still don't get this rational. If you ask me
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 05:44:25PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
It does not need to allocate space and copy fw_name in function
sdma_get_firmware().
Signed-off-by: Shawn Guo shawn@linaro.org
Cc: Vinod Koul vinod.k...@intel.com
Cc: Sascha Hauer s.ha...@pengutronix.de
Acked-by: Uwe
Hi Shawn,
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 05:44:26PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
It adds device tree probe support for imx-sdma driver.
Signed-off-by: Shawn Guo shawn@linaro.org
Cc: Grant Likely grant.lik...@secretlab.ca
Cc: Vinod Koul vinod.k...@intel.com
Cc: Sascha Hauer s.ha...@pengutronix.de
Dear Mr. Kim,
On 5 September 2011 10:47, Kukjin Kim kgene@samsung.com wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Thomas Abraham [mailto:thomas.abra...@linaro.org]
Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 6:05 PM
To: devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org
Cc: grant.lik...@secretlab.ca;
Dear Mr. Kim,
On 5 September 2011 10:47, Kukjin Kim kgene@samsung.com wrote:
Vinod Koul wrote:
On Fri, 2011-08-26 at 14:10 +0530, Thomas Abraham wrote:
This patchset adds device tree support for PL330 driver and uses it
to add device tree support for Samsung platforms, specifically
Minor comments:
On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 07:25:11PM +0200, Benoit Cousson wrote:
Create an OMAP3 generic board to start the DT migration.
This file is doing the minimal initialization needed to boot
properly on a RAMDISK filesystem.
As soon as the OMAP3 specifics will be removed, that
Hi Arnd,
On 9/1/2011 8:17 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Thursday 01 September 2011 19:25:07 Benoit Cousson wrote:
/*
+* XXX: The cpus node is mandatory, but since the CPUs are as well part
+* of the mpu subsystem below, it is not clear where the information
+*
* Nicolas Pitre nicolas.pi...@linaro.org [110613 13:41]:
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011, Grant Likely wrote:
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 12:06 AM, Nicolas Pitre
nicolas.pi...@linaro.org wrote:
This is a resend of those patches with fixups after the latest changes
in mainline.
[PATCH 1/3] ARM:
On 9/1/2011 8:27 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Thursday 01 September 2011 19:21:20 Benoit Cousson wrote:
+#ifdef CONFIG_OF
+#define MODALIAS_SIZE 32
+
+static int add_of_children(struct i2c_client *client, unsigned long features)
+{
+ u32 reg;
+ struct device *child, *dev =client-dev;
On Monday 05 September 2011, Cousson, Benoit wrote:
Yeah, I saw that in the cpus node documentation. My point here is that
I do need to represent the MPU subsystem that will contain the cpus. And
thus the Cortex is inside the MPU subsystem.
I can potentially keep the CPUs inside the cpus
On 9/5/2011 7:23 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Monday 05 September 2011, Cousson, Benoit wrote:
Yeah, I saw that in the cpus node documentation. My point here is that
I do need to represent the MPU subsystem that will contain the cpus. And
thus the Cortex is inside the MPU subsystem.
The
On Mon, 5 Sep 2011, Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Nicolas Pitre nicolas.pi...@linaro.org [110613 13:41]:
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011, Grant Likely wrote:
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 12:06 AM, Nicolas Pitre
nicolas.pi...@linaro.org wrote:
This is a resend of those patches with fixups after the latest
Hello Paul,
thanks for your reply.
On Tue, 30 Aug 2011, Pierre Beaumon wrote:
Also I believe one big arm problem is a lack of common
infrastructure that lead to code duplication. Some machine try to
do too much things. omap2 (mach-omap2 + plat-omap) is about 80
KSLOC over 400KSLOC (76
13 matches
Mail list logo
