On Wed 2016-12-21 15:25:05, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 06:32:46PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > On Thu 2016-12-08 12:08:38, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > > Change livepatch to use a basic per-task consistency model. This is the
> > > foundation which will eventually enable us to p
From: Felix Fietkau
The sign-file tool failed to build against libressl. Fix this by extending
the PKCS7 check and thus making sign-file link against libressl without an
error.
Signed-off-by: John Crispin
Signed-off-by: Felix Fietkau
---
scripts/sign-file.c |4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 inse
Hi Pavel,
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 02:39:38PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> N900 contains front and back camera, with a switch between the
> two. This adds support for the swich component.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Reichel
> Signed-off-by: Ivaylo Dimitrov
> Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek
>
> --
On Thu, 22 Dec 2016, Andrejczuk, Grzegorz wrote:
> >It also warns on the 64bit build.
>
> It is, I missed it. I changed the type of elf_hwcap2 to long unsigned int.
Changing types to match is the proper solution to all problems? You cannot
just change types to make the compiler happy. You have
Hi Linus,
Please pull from the tag
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git \
acpi-extra-4.10-rc1
with top-most commit c8e008e2a6f9ec007a0e22e18eeb5bace5bf16c8
Merge branches 'acpica' and 'acpi-scan'
on top of commit 7ae123edd37a47e178eb9a6631fe4a7108262c10
Merge
On 12/07/2016 10:55 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 08:57:23AM +0800, Ayaka wrote:
從我的 iPad 傳送
Thierry Reding 於 2016年12月6日 下午11:46 寫道：
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 03:02:51AM +0800, Randy Li wrote:
The Chunghwa CLAA070WP03XG is a 7" 1280x800 panel, which can be
supported by t
Hi Eric,
On 12/13/2016 10:32 PM, Eric Auger wrote:
> In case the IOMMU does not bypass MSI transactions (typical
> case on ARM), we check all MSI controllers are IRQ remapping
> capable. If not the IRQ assignment may be unsafe.
>
> At this stage the arm-smmu-(v3) still advertise the
> IOMMU_CAP_IN
Hi Linus,
Please pull from the tag
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git \
pm-fixes-4.10-rc1
with top-most commit 7b99f1aeed37196ad54099c30c2f154a7d6e91e0
Merge branch 'pm-cpufreq'
on top of commit 7ae123edd37a47e178eb9a6631fe4a7108262c10
Merge tag 'acpi-urgent
It turned out current implementation of CCM support doesn't work at all.
There're 2 isseus:
* Data/code which is supposed to be in DCCM or ICCM accordingly gets
merged in common .data and .text sections so CCMs won't be used
* Kerenl will panic on early boot because comparison of CCM sizes
CONFIG_ARC_ICCM_SZ in menuconfig is specified in kB while
"cpu->Xccm.sz" contains value in bytes thus direct comparison fails
leading to boot-time panic like that:
--->8-
IDENTITY: ARCVER [0x52] ARCNUM [0x1] CHIPID [ 0x0]
processor [1] : ARC HS38 R2
If Linux kernel is compiled with "-ffunction-sections" each function is placed
in
its own section named ".text.function_name". This is required for
discarding of not-used functions during final linkage. But in the end
all ".text.XXX" sections are merged in the global ".text" section of
vmlinux Elf
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 09:45:09AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 01:42:28PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > What are you trying to order here?
> >
> > I suppose something like this:
> >
> >
> > CPU0CPU1CPU2
> >
> > (current ==
This is a patch to the skein_base.c file that fixes up a
comment aligning warning found by the checkpatch.pl tool at line 2
Signed-off-by: Tobias Heineken
Signed-off-by: Florian Schleicher
CC: linux-ker...@i4.cs.fau.de
---
drivers/staging/skein/skein_base.c | 16
1 file changed
Dear Doug & Xing Zheng,
在 2016年12月22日 08:47, Doug Anderson 写道:
Hi,
On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 2:41 AM, Xing Zheng wrote:
From: William wu
We found that the suspend process was blocked when it run into
ehci/ohci module due to clk-480m of usb2-phy was disabled.
The root cause is that usb2-phy s
On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 03:43:43PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> anon_vma locking is clever^Wsubtle as hell. CC Peter...
>
> On Tue 20-12-16 09:32:27, Dashi DS1 Cao wrote:
> > I've collected four crash dumps with similar backtrace.
> >
> > PID: 247TASK: 881fcfad8000 CPU: 14 COMMAND: "ks
This patch adds support for the STM32F4 I2C controller.
Signed-off-by: M'boumba Cedric Madianga
---
drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig | 10 +
drivers/i2c/busses/Makefile | 1 +
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-stm32f4.c | 896 +++
3 files changed, 907 insertions(
This patch adds I2C1 support for STM32F429 SoC
Signed-off-by: Patrice Chotard
Signed-off-by: M'boumba Cedric Madianga
---
arch/arm/boot/dts/stm32f429.dtsi | 23 +++
1 file changed, 23 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/stm32f429.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/stm32f429.
This patch adds documentation of device tree bindings for the STM32 I2C
controller.
Signed-off-by: M'boumba Cedric Madianga
Acked-by: Rob Herring
---
.../devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-stm32.txt | 33 ++
1 file changed, 33 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 Documentatio
N900 contains front and back camera, with a switch between the
two. This adds support for the swich component.
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Reichel
Signed-off-by: Ivaylo Dimitrov
Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek
--
I see this needs dts documentation, anything else than needs to be
done?
Thanks,
This patch adds I2C1 instance support for STM32x9I-Eval board.
Signed-off-by: M'boumba Cedric Madianga
---
arch/arm/boot/dts/stm32429i-eval.dts | 6 ++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/stm32429i-eval.dts
b/arch/arm/boot/dts/stm32429i-eval.dts
index afb90bc..74
This patch adds I2C support for STM32 default configuration
Signed-off-by: M'boumba Cedric Madianga
---
arch/arm/configs/stm32_defconfig | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm/configs/stm32_defconfig b/arch/arm/configs/stm32_defconfig
index e7b56d4..9494eaf 100644
--- a/
This patchset adds support for the I2C controller embedded in STM32F4xx SoC.
It enables I2C transfer in interrupt mode with Standard-mode and Fast-mode bus
speed.
Changes since v6:
- Add commit message for the patches in defconfig, .dtsi and .dts files (Alex)
- Order I2C instance base address in .
Em Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 03:03:48PM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
> Current default value is 20 but it's easily changed to a bigger value as
> task has a long name and different tid and pid. And it makes the output
> not aligned. So change it to have a large value as summary shows.
So you're doin
Cc Anton, Colin, Kees, Tony on this
https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=148226086323932
On (12/20/16 19:53), Sven Schmidt wrote:
>
> This patch updates the fs/pstore and fs/squashfs to work with the
> new LZ4 kernel module version.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sven Schmidt <4ssch...@informatik.uni-hambur
On Thu, 2016-12-22 at 10:38 +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
> >
> > The spinlock is only used to serialize callers that want to increment
> > the counter. We can achieve the same thing with an atomic64_t and
> > get the i_lock out of this codepat
Cc Herbert and linux-crypto on this
https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=148226084823926
On (12/20/16 19:53), Sven Schmidt wrote:
>
> This patch updates the crypto modules using LZ4 compression to work with the
> new LZ4 kernel module version.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sven Schmidt <4ssch...@informat
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 12:29:26AM -0800, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> This patch solves a race condition between PEBS and the PMU handler.
>
> In case multiple PEBS events are sampled at the same time,
> it is possible to have GLOBAL_STATUS bit 62 set indicating
> PEBS buffer overflow and also seein
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 11:19:17PM +1300, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra writes:
>
> > On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 08:21:23PM +1300, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >>
> >> And please make the array the last item in the structure so that
> >> expanding or contracting it does not affect the abi
On (12/20/16 19:53), Sven Schmidt wrote:
> @@ -366,7 +366,7 @@ static int decompress_lz4(void *in, void *out, size_t
> inlen, size_t outlen)
>
> static void allocate_lz4(void)
> {
> - big_oops_buf_sz = lz4_compressbound(psinfo->bufsize);
> + big_oops_buf_sz = LZ4_compressBound(psinfo->
From: Keith Busch
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2016 7:47 PM
To: Kheria, Rashika
Cc: Christoph Hellwig; Kheria, Rashika; linux-n...@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] NVMe: Call nvme_pci_disable on error path of
nvme_probe_work
On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 1:47 PM, Hannes Frederic Sowa
wrote:
> following up on what appears to be a random subject: ;)
>
> IIRC, ext4 code by default still uses half_md4 for hashing of filenames
> in the htree. siphash seems to fit this use case pretty good.
I saw this too. I'll try to address it
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 21:53, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 09:03:38PM +0200, Alexander Koch wrote:
>> The ADC128D818 offers four operation modes (see datasheet sec. 8.4.1)
>> which vary in the number of available input signals and their types
>> (differential vs. absolute).
>>
>>
Hi Diana,
On 22/12/2016 13:41, Diana Madalina Craciun wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> On 12/13/2016 10:32 PM, Eric Auger wrote:
>> In case the IOMMU does not bypass MSI transactions (typical
>> case on ARM), we check all MSI controllers are IRQ remapping
>> capable. If not the IRQ assignment may be unsafe.
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 6:35 AM, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> From: Hanjun Guo
>
> With the platform msi domain created, we can set up the msi domain
> for a platform device when it's probed.
>
> In order to do that, we need to get the domain that the platform
> device connecting to, so the iort_get_platf
On 22.12.2016 09:18, Yury Norov wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 03:50:55AM +0300, Alexander Popov wrote:
>> Introduce kaslr_offset() similarly to x86_64 for fixing kcov.
[...]
> Hi Alexander,
>
> I found today's linux-next master broken:
[...]
> It looks like you declare kaslr_offset() twice
Hi Ted,
On Thu, 2016-12-22 at 00:41 -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 03:49:39AM +0100, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> >
> > Funny -- while you guys were sending this back & forth, I was writing
> > my reply to Andy which essentially arrives at the same conclusion.
> > Given that
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Value of anon_vma:
print *((struct anon_vma *)0x8820833ed940)
$2 = {
root = 0x0,
rwsem = {
count = 0,
wait_lock = {
raw_lock = {
{
head_tail = 0,
tickets = {
head = 0,
tail = 0
}
}
}
},
w
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies. A previous version of this semantic patch transformed
only cases where the show and store functions followed particular naming
conventions. This
Hi Dongdong,
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 8:30 PM, Dongdong Liu wrote:
> Hi Ming
>
> The latest patchset is [PATCH v11 00/15] PCI: ARM64 ECAM quirks
> You can get them from
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/helgaas/pci.git (pci/ecam)
OK, thanks, looks it has been in linus tree.
Thank
When testing stmmac with my QoS reference design I checked a problem in the
CSR clock configuration that was impossibilitating the phy discovery, since
every read operation returned 0x. This patch fixes the issue.
Signed-off-by: Joao Pinto
---
changes v1->v2 (David Miller)
- DWMAC100 and
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
On 19/12/2016 15:58, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 02:30:35PM -0800, David Matlack wrote:
>> Modules that use static_key_deferred need a way to synchronize with
>> any delayed work that is still pending when the module is unloaded.
>> Introduce static_key_deferred_flush() which
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
On 21/12/2016 14:23, Roman Kagan wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 01:00:44PM +0100, Olaf Hering wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 20, Roman Kagan wrote:
>>
>> Reverting commit 22356585712d ("staging: hv: use sync_bitops when
>> interacting with the hypervisor") is save because ...
>>
>>> - sync
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Hi David,
Às 10:15 AM de 12/22/2016, Joao Pinto escreveu:
> Às 6:21 PM de 12/21/2016, David Miller escreveu:
>> From: Joao Pinto
>> Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 11:21:47 +
>>
>>> When testing stmmac with my QoS reference design I checked a problem in the
>>> CSR clock configuration that was imposs
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Hi Ming
The latest patchset is [PATCH v11 00/15] PCI: ARM64 ECAM quirks
You can get them from
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/helgaas/pci.git (pci/ecam)
Thanks
Dongdong
在 2016/12/22 16:31, Ming Lei 写道:
Hi Dongdong,
On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 8:08 PM, Dongdong Liu wrote:
This pa
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> Hi Julia,
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 08:39:38PM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Julia,
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 03:05:37PM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > > A solution is below:
KMSAN (KernelMemorySanitizer, a new error detection tool) reports use of
uninitialized memory in ext4_update_bh_state():
==
BUG: KMSAN: use of unitialized memory
CPU: 3 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Tainted: GB 4.8.0-rc6+ #597
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
Use DEVICE_ATTR_RO etc. for read only attributes etc. This simplifies the
source code, improves readbility, and reduces the chance of
inconsistencies.
The semantic patch for the RO case, in the case where the show function
already has the expected name, is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
401 - 500 of 590 matches
Mail list logo
