On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 11:32:30AM -0500, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
> I didn't see a final ACK on this patch -- just checking for one :)
The patch was redone - we now check for error from the 'flush' command
before sending CTL_TEST.
> P.
>
> Prarit Bhargava wrote:
>
> >I've taken into account Dmi
On Monday 14 February 2005 11:32, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
> I didn't see a final ACK on this patch -- just checking for one :)
>
> P.
I see that resource allocation part is in Vojtech's tree now but the
part changing timeout message was dropped.
--
Dmitry
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send th
I didn't see a final ACK on this patch -- just checking for one :)
P.
Prarit Bhargava wrote:
I've taken into account Dmitry's comments (thanks Dmitry!) and
generated a new patch.
Thanks,
P.
Jesse Barnes wrote:
On Friday, January 21, 2005 8:35 am, Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
No. But vacant ports usua
On Jan 21, 2005, at 14:26, Dave Jones wrote:
- printk(KERN_ERR "i8042.c: i8042 controller
self
test timeout.\n");
wordwrapped patch.
Err, it showed up fine for me. I suspect your mail client or server is
mangling emails.
}
}
I doubt these }'s sh
On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 10:14:46AM -0500, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Prarit Bhargava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> = i8042.c 1.71 vs edited =
> --- 1.71/drivers/input/serio/i8042.c2005-01-03 08:11:49 -05:00
> +++ edited/i8042.c 2005-01-21 10:02:20 -05:00
> @@ -696,7
I've taken into account Dmitry's comments (thanks Dmitry!) and generated
a new patch.
Thanks,
P.
Jesse Barnes wrote:
On Friday, January 21, 2005 8:35 am, Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
No. But vacant ports usually return 0xff. The problem here is that 0xff
is a valid value for the status register, too.
On Friday, January 21, 2005 8:35 am, Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
> No. But vacant ports usually return 0xff. The problem here is that 0xff
> is a valid value for the status register, too. Fortunately this patch
> checks for 0xff only after the timeout failed.
On PCs you'll get all 1s, but on some ia64 p
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 17:35:40 +0100, Vojtech Pavlik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 10:43:36AM -0500, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 10:14:46 -0500, Prarit Bhargava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > The following patch cleans up re
On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 10:43:36AM -0500, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 10:14:46 -0500, Prarit Bhargava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > The following patch cleans up resource allocations in the i8042 driver
> > when initialization fails.
> >
> ...
> >
> >
Hi,
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 10:14:46 -0500, Prarit Bhargava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The following patch cleans up resource allocations in the i8042 driver
> when initialization fails.
>
...
>
>if (i8042_command(¶m, I8042_CMD_CTL_TEST)) {
> - printk
Hi,
The following patch cleans up resource allocations in the i8042 driver
when initialization fails.
Please consider for tree application. Patch is generated against
current bk pull.
Thanks,
P.
Signed-off-by: Prarit Bhargava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
= i8042.c 1.71 vs edited =
--- 1.71/driv
11 matches
Mail list logo
