On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 04:05:06PM +0100, Ladislav Michl wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 07:44:25AM -0600, Derald D. Woods wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 06:13:51PM -0600, Adam Ford wrote:
> > > On Dec 12, 2017 12:41 PM, "Ladislav Michl" wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 12:24:02PM
On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 07:44:25AM -0600, Derald D. Woods wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 06:13:51PM -0600, Adam Ford wrote:
> > On Dec 12, 2017 12:41 PM, "Ladislav Michl" wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 12:24:02PM -0600, Derald D. Woods wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 10:15:03AM -08
On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 06:13:51PM -0600, Adam Ford wrote:
> On Dec 12, 2017 12:41 PM, "Ladislav Michl" wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 12:24:02PM -0600, Derald D. Woods wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 10:15:03AM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > Well that's good to hear :) My only concern
On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 12:24:02PM -0600, Derald D. Woods wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 10:15:03AM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > Well that's good to hear :) My only concern with your patch is what
> > happens if somebody boots with older u-boot with different partition
> > sizes?
>
> I agree.
On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 10:15:03AM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Derald D. Woods [171212 18:11]:
> > On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 06:50:54PM +0100, Ladislav Michl wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 08:55:42AM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > > * Derald D. Woods [171212 16:34]:
> > > > > I am test
* Derald D. Woods [171212 18:11]:
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 06:50:54PM +0100, Ladislav Michl wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 08:55:42AM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > * Derald D. Woods [171212 16:34]:
> > > > I am testing using an appended device-tree. This has been the most
> > > > reliabl
On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 06:50:54PM +0100, Ladislav Michl wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 08:55:42AM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > * Derald D. Woods [171212 16:34]:
> > > I am testing using an appended device-tree. This has been the most
> > > reliable method for the OMAP34XX boards that I have.
On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 08:55:42AM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Derald D. Woods [171212 16:34]:
> > I am testing using an appended device-tree. This has been the most
> > reliable method for the OMAP34XX boards that I have. If you have an
> > example config, with working command line MTDPARTS,
On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 10:31:26AM -0600, Derald D. Woods wrote:
> > What about passing U-Boot partitions information to kernel instead?
>
> I am testing using an appended device-tree. This has been the most
> reliable method for the OMAP34XX boards that I have. If you have an
> example config, wit
* Derald D. Woods [171212 16:34]:
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 07:39:30AM +0100, Ladislav Michl wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 10:12:13PM -0600, Derald D. Woods wrote:
> > > The partition information was omitted during the conversion to OMAP3430
> > > specific data.
> >
> > That could be intenti
On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 07:39:30AM +0100, Ladislav Michl wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 10:12:13PM -0600, Derald D. Woods wrote:
> > The partition information was omitted during the conversion to OMAP3430
> > specific data.
>
> That could be intentional...
I am fixing an addition that I created
On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 10:12:13PM -0600, Derald D. Woods wrote:
> The partition information was omitted during the conversion to OMAP3430
> specific data.
That could be intentional...
> The data added by this commit is consistent with current U-Boot default
> definitions.
What about passing U-B
The partition information was omitted during the conversion to OMAP3430
specific data. The data added by this commit is consistent with current
U-Boot default definitions.
Fixes: 62fe1d337461 ("ARM: dts: omap3-evm: Add OMAP3530 specific device
tree processor data")
Signed-off-by: Derald D. Woods
13 matches
Mail list logo