Kernel "pci_ids.h" file has data for that card missing.
Also, Ellen needs some control bits flipped before it functions properly
as SDIO controller by the spec.
Should apply clenly to Linus and Drzeus trees. Please apply.
Signed-off-by: Vitaly Luban <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
Hi,
I'm sorry, the previous message slipped out w/o subj.
Attached patch is an implementation of "signal-per-fd"
enhancement to kernel RT signal mechanism, AFAIK first
proposed by A. Chandra and D. Mosberger :
http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/2000/HPL-2000-174.html
which should dramatically i
Attached patch is an implementation of "signal-per-fd"
enhancement to kernel RT signal mechanism, AFAIK first
proposed by A. Chandra and D. Mosberger :
http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/2000/HPL-2000-174.html
which should dramatically increase linux based network
servers scalability.
Patch is m
Hi,
Steve Hill wrote:
> I'm building boxes with the console set to /dev/ttyS0. However, I can't
> guarantee that there will always be a term plugged into the serial
> port. If there is no term on the port, eventually the buffer fills and
> any processes that write to the console (i.e. init) bl
Hi,
I've got a PCI resource conflict on PowerPC Motorola MCP 750 system
while booting 2.4.0-test10. It works happily under 2.2.16 w/o any problems.
messages and lspci for 2.2.16 and 2.4.0-test10 attached.
I'd be grateful on any comments, thanks :)
BTW, Martin, do you know why to complain about
Hi,
Got my hands on 2.4 using test-9 tree from fsmlabs.
Looks like for Mesquite to run it still has to have the same patch as
was made for 2.2, attached below against fsmlabs 2_3 snapshot tree
fom Oct 10.
2.4 on Mesquite shows rather wierd behavior, does not accept command line
and has a problem
Dan Hollis wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, Vitaly Luban wrote:
> > One may have cPCI configuration with two or more NICs on each side
> > of the router, with dynamic IP reallocation and hotswap that's make sense
> > IMHO.
>
> Easy for ethernet where you have sha
Dan Hollis wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Sep 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > I'd disagree on the ISP thing too btw. Telcos care a lot about hotswap PCI,
> > but ISP services you can take a down box with a failover of a machine -
> > which in general is a lot easier and overall better coverage
>
> Alan, you want
Ondrej Feela Filip wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Am I right in assumming that 2.2.14 (as from RH6.2) supports cPCI? Or do I
> > need to start developing on 2.4?
>
> ? I believe, that PCI and cPCI are from SW view identical. I run linux
> (2.2.13+) on many cPCI system
9 matches
Mail list logo
