On Tue, 2015-03-31 at 21:52 -0700, Grant Likely wrote:
> Thinking about this more, I'd like to suggest a different format that
> gives us a nice hack on the name that makes it easy to remember:
> '%pOF[...]'
> 'O' still means 'object', but it is also overloaded for Open Firmware.
> That
On Tue, 31 Mar 2015 13:03:05 +0300
, Pantelis Antoniou
wrote:
> > +Device tree nodes:
> > +
> > + %pOn[fnpPcCFr]
> > +
> > + For printing device tree nodes. The optional arguments are:
> > + f device node full_name
> > + n device node name
> > + p device node phandle
> > +
Hi Grant,
> On Mar 31, 2015, at 20:02 , Grant Likely wrote:
>
> Hi Pantelis,
>
> Thanks for the quick reply. Comments below...
>
> On Tue, 31 Mar 2015 13:03:05 +0300
> , Pantelis Antoniou
> wrote:
>> Hi Grant,
>>
>>> On Mar 30, 2015, at 22:04 , Grant Likely wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, 22 Jan
Hi Pantelis,
Thanks for the quick reply. Comments below...
On Tue, 31 Mar 2015 13:03:05 +0300
, Pantelis Antoniou
wrote:
> Hi Grant,
>
> > On Mar 30, 2015, at 22:04 , Grant Likely wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 22 Jan 2015 22:31:46 +0200
> > , Pantelis Antoniou
> > wrote:
> >> Hi Joe,
> >>
> >>>
Hi Grant,
> On Mar 30, 2015, at 22:04 , Grant Likely wrote:
>
> On Thu, 22 Jan 2015 22:31:46 +0200
> , Pantelis Antoniou
> wrote:
>> Hi Joe,
>>
>>> On Jan 21, 2015, at 19:37 , Joe Perches wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 19:06 +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
90% of the usage of
Hi Grant,
On Mar 30, 2015, at 22:04 , Grant Likely grant.lik...@secretlab.ca wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2015 22:31:46 +0200
, Pantelis Antoniou pa...@antoniou-consulting.com
wrote:
Hi Joe,
On Jan 21, 2015, at 19:37 , Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote:
On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 19:06 +0200,
On Tue, 2015-03-31 at 21:52 -0700, Grant Likely wrote:
Thinking about this more, I'd like to suggest a different format that
gives us a nice hack on the name that makes it easy to remember:
'%pOF[...]'
'O' still means 'object', but it is also overloaded for Open Firmware.
That still
On Tue, 31 Mar 2015 13:03:05 +0300
, Pantelis Antoniou pantelis.anton...@konsulko.com
wrote:
+Device tree nodes:
+
+ %pOn[fnpPcCFr]
+
+ For printing device tree nodes. The optional arguments are:
+ f device node full_name
+ n device node name
+ p device node
Hi Pantelis,
Thanks for the quick reply. Comments below...
On Tue, 31 Mar 2015 13:03:05 +0300
, Pantelis Antoniou pantelis.anton...@konsulko.com
wrote:
Hi Grant,
On Mar 30, 2015, at 22:04 , Grant Likely grant.lik...@secretlab.ca wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2015 22:31:46 +0200
, Pantelis
Hi Grant,
On Mar 31, 2015, at 20:02 , Grant Likely grant.lik...@secretlab.ca wrote:
Hi Pantelis,
Thanks for the quick reply. Comments below...
On Tue, 31 Mar 2015 13:03:05 +0300
, Pantelis Antoniou pantelis.anton...@konsulko.com
wrote:
Hi Grant,
On Mar 30, 2015, at 22:04 , Grant
On Thu, 22 Jan 2015 22:31:46 +0200
, Pantelis Antoniou
wrote:
> Hi Joe,
>
> > On Jan 21, 2015, at 19:37 , Joe Perches wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 19:06 +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
> >> 90% of the usage of device node's full_name is printing it out
> >> in a kernel message.
On Thu, 22 Jan 2015 22:31:46 +0200
, Pantelis Antoniou pa...@antoniou-consulting.com
wrote:
Hi Joe,
On Jan 21, 2015, at 19:37 , Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote:
On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 19:06 +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
90% of the usage of device node's full_name is printing it
Hi Joe,
> On Jan 21, 2015, at 19:37 , Joe Perches wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 19:06 +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
>> 90% of the usage of device node's full_name is printing it out
>> in a kernel message. Preparing for the eventual delayed allocation
>> introduce a custom printk format
Hi Joe,
On Jan 21, 2015, at 19:37 , Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote:
On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 19:06 +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
90% of the usage of device node's full_name is printing it out
in a kernel message. Preparing for the eventual delayed allocation
introduce a custom printk
Pantelis Antoniou writes:
> Hi Joe,
>
>> On Jan 21, 2015, at 19:37 , Joe Perches wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 19:06 +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
>>> 90% of the usage of device node's full_name is printing it out
>>> in a kernel message. Preparing for the eventual delayed allocation
On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 19:39 +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
> Hi Joe,
>
> > On Jan 21, 2015, at 19:37 , Joe Perches wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 19:06 +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
> >> 90% of the usage of device node's full_name is printing it out
> >> in a kernel message. Preparing
Hi Joe,
> On Jan 21, 2015, at 19:37 , Joe Perches wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 19:06 +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
>> 90% of the usage of device node's full_name is printing it out
>> in a kernel message. Preparing for the eventual delayed allocation
>> introduce a custom printk format
On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 19:06 +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
> 90% of the usage of device node's full_name is printing it out
> in a kernel message. Preparing for the eventual delayed allocation
> introduce a custom printk format specifier that is both more
> compact and more pleasant to the eye.
>
90% of the usage of device node's full_name is printing it out
in a kernel message. Preparing for the eventual delayed allocation
introduce a custom printk format specifier that is both more
compact and more pleasant to the eye.
For instance typical use is:
pr_info("Frobbing node %s\n",
On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 19:39 +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
Hi Joe,
On Jan 21, 2015, at 19:37 , Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote:
On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 19:06 +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
90% of the usage of device node's full_name is printing it out
in a kernel message.
Hi Joe,
On Jan 21, 2015, at 19:37 , Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote:
On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 19:06 +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
90% of the usage of device node's full_name is printing it out
in a kernel message. Preparing for the eventual delayed allocation
introduce a custom printk
Pantelis Antoniou pa...@antoniou-consulting.com writes:
Hi Joe,
On Jan 21, 2015, at 19:37 , Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote:
On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 19:06 +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
90% of the usage of device node's full_name is printing it out
in a kernel message. Preparing for the
On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 19:06 +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
90% of the usage of device node's full_name is printing it out
in a kernel message. Preparing for the eventual delayed allocation
introduce a custom printk format specifier that is both more
compact and more pleasant to the eye.
90% of the usage of device node's full_name is printing it out
in a kernel message. Preparing for the eventual delayed allocation
introduce a custom printk format specifier that is both more
compact and more pleasant to the eye.
For instance typical use is:
pr_info(Frobbing node %s\n,
On Tue, 2015-01-20 at 20:06 +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
> On Jan 20, 2015, at 19:59 , Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Tue, 2015-01-20 at 16:52 +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
> >>> On Jan 20, 2015, at 16:47 , Rob Herring wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Pantelis Antoniou
> >>> wrote:
Hi Joe,
> On Jan 20, 2015, at 19:59 , Joe Perches wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2015-01-20 at 16:52 +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
>> Hi Rob,
>>
>>> On Jan 20, 2015, at 16:47 , Rob Herring wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Pantelis Antoniou
>>> wrote:
90% of the usage of device
On Tue, 2015-01-20 at 16:52 +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> > On Jan 20, 2015, at 16:47 , Rob Herring wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Pantelis Antoniou
> > wrote:
> >> 90% of the usage of device node's full_name is printing it out
> >> in a kernel message.
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Måns Rullgård wrote:
> Pantelis Antoniou writes:
>
>> Hi Geert,
>>
>>> On Jan 20, 2015, at 17:24 , Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> + Examples:
> +
> + %pO /foo/bar@0
Pantelis Antoniou writes:
> Hi Geert,
>
>> On Jan 20, 2015, at 17:24 , Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
+ Examples:
+
+ %pO /foo/bar@0 - Node full name
+ %pO0/foo/bar@0 -
Hi Geert,
> On Jan 20, 2015, at 17:24 , Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> + Examples:
>>> +
>>> + %pO /foo/bar@0 - Node full name
>>> + %pO0/foo/bar@0 - Same as above
>>> + %pO1
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
>> + Examples:
>> +
>> + %pO /foo/bar@0 - Node full name
>> + %pO0/foo/bar@0 - Same as above
>> + %pO1/foo/bar@0[10] - Node full name + phandle
>> + %pO2
Hi Rob,
> On Jan 20, 2015, at 16:47 , Rob Herring wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Pantelis Antoniou
> wrote:
>> 90% of the usage of device node's full_name is printing it out
>> in a kernel message. Preparing for the eventual delayed allocation
>> introduce a custom printk format
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Pantelis Antoniou
wrote:
> 90% of the usage of device node's full_name is printing it out
> in a kernel message. Preparing for the eventual delayed allocation
> introduce a custom printk format specifier that is both more
> compact and more pleasant to the eye.
90% of the usage of device node's full_name is printing it out
in a kernel message. Preparing for the eventual delayed allocation
introduce a custom printk format specifier that is both more
compact and more pleasant to the eye.
For instance typical use is:
pr_info("Frobbing node %s\n",
90% of the usage of device node's full_name is printing it out
in a kernel message. Preparing for the eventual delayed allocation
introduce a custom printk format specifier that is both more
compact and more pleasant to the eye.
For instance typical use is:
pr_info(Frobbing node %s\n,
Hi Rob,
On Jan 20, 2015, at 16:47 , Rob Herring robherri...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Pantelis Antoniou
pantelis.anton...@konsulko.com wrote:
90% of the usage of device node's full_name is printing it out
in a kernel message. Preparing for the eventual delayed
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Pantelis Antoniou
pantelis.anton...@konsulko.com wrote:
90% of the usage of device node's full_name is printing it out
in a kernel message. Preparing for the eventual delayed allocation
introduce a custom printk format specifier that is both more
compact and
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Måns Rullgård m...@mansr.com wrote:
Pantelis Antoniou pantelis.anton...@konsulko.com writes:
Hi Geert,
On Jan 20, 2015, at 17:24 , Geert Uytterhoeven ge...@linux-m68k.org wrote:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Rob Herring robherri...@gmail.com wrote:
+
Hi Geert,
On Jan 20, 2015, at 17:24 , Geert Uytterhoeven ge...@linux-m68k.org wrote:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Rob Herring robherri...@gmail.com wrote:
+ Examples:
+
+ %pO /foo/bar@0 - Node full name
+ %pO0/foo/bar@0 - Same as
Pantelis Antoniou pantelis.anton...@konsulko.com writes:
Hi Geert,
On Jan 20, 2015, at 17:24 , Geert Uytterhoeven ge...@linux-m68k.org wrote:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Rob Herring robherri...@gmail.com wrote:
+ Examples:
+
+ %pO /foo/bar@0 - Node full
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Rob Herring robherri...@gmail.com wrote:
+ Examples:
+
+ %pO /foo/bar@0 - Node full name
+ %pO0/foo/bar@0 - Same as above
+ %pO1/foo/bar@0[10] - Node full name + phandle
+ %pO2
On Tue, 2015-01-20 at 20:06 +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
On Jan 20, 2015, at 19:59 , Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote:
On Tue, 2015-01-20 at 16:52 +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
On Jan 20, 2015, at 16:47 , Rob Herring robherri...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 8:34 AM,
Hi Joe,
On Jan 20, 2015, at 19:59 , Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote:
On Tue, 2015-01-20 at 16:52 +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
Hi Rob,
On Jan 20, 2015, at 16:47 , Rob Herring robherri...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Pantelis Antoniou
On Tue, 2015-01-20 at 16:52 +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
Hi Rob,
On Jan 20, 2015, at 16:47 , Rob Herring robherri...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Pantelis Antoniou
pantelis.anton...@konsulko.com wrote:
90% of the usage of device node's full_name is printing it
44 matches
Mail list logo
