On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 12:00:00PM +, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Nov 2012, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Right, which is why this mostly works, but it's still better to provide
> > an actual compatible string which we can be 100% certain will avoid
> > conflicts. This is very low cost when one is
On Thu, 29 Nov 2012, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 10:08:08AM +, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Wed, 28 Nov 2012, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > The I2C subsystem guesses at a compatible string by default but it's
> > > much better to explicitly set one as conflicts do arise from time to
>
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 10:08:08AM +, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Nov 2012, Mark Brown wrote:
> > The I2C subsystem guesses at a compatible string by default but it's
> > much better to explicitly set one as conflicts do arise from time to
> > time (eg, Wolfson parts are called WM but
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 08:57:31AM +, Lee Jones wrote:
>
> > > I applied these 3 patches, but for DT we also need to specify compatible
> > > ID and set up of_match_table pointer.
>
> > Why do you need a compatible string?
>
> The I2C subsystem
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012, Mark Brown wrote:
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 08:57:31AM +, Lee Jones wrote:
I applied these 3 patches, but for DT we also need to specify compatible
ID and set up of_match_table pointer.
Why do you need a compatible string?
The I2C subsystem guesses at a
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 10:08:08AM +, Lee Jones wrote:
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012, Mark Brown wrote:
The I2C subsystem guesses at a compatible string by default but it's
much better to explicitly set one as conflicts do arise from time to
time (eg, Wolfson parts are called WM but the WM
On Thu, 29 Nov 2012, Mark Brown wrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 10:08:08AM +, Lee Jones wrote:
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012, Mark Brown wrote:
The I2C subsystem guesses at a compatible string by default but it's
much better to explicitly set one as conflicts do arise from time to
time
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 12:00:00PM +, Lee Jones wrote:
On Thu, 29 Nov 2012, Mark Brown wrote:
Right, which is why this mostly works, but it's still better to provide
an actual compatible string which we can be 100% certain will avoid
conflicts. This is very low cost when one is
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 08:57:31AM +, Lee Jones wrote:
> > I applied these 3 patches, but for DT we also need to specify compatible
> > ID and set up of_match_table pointer.
> Why do you need a compatible string?
The I2C subsystem guesses at a compatible string by default but it's
much
Author: Lee Jones
Date: Fri Sep 28 14:35:43 2012 +0100
Input: bu21013_ts - Add support for Device Tree booting
Now we can register the BU21013_ts touch screen when booting with
Device Tree enabled. Here we parse all the necessary components
previously expected to be passed
Hi Dmitry,
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 01:13:10PM +, Lee Jones wrote:
> > Now we can register the BU21013_ts touch screen when booting with
> > Device Tree enabled. Here we parse all the necessary components
> > previously expected to be passed from platform data.
>
> I applied these 3
Hi Dmitry,
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 01:13:10PM +, Lee Jones wrote:
Now we can register the BU21013_ts touch screen when booting with
Device Tree enabled. Here we parse all the necessary components
previously expected to be passed from platform data.
I applied these 3 patches, but for
Author: Lee Jones lee.jo...@linaro.org
Date: Fri Sep 28 14:35:43 2012 +0100
Input: bu21013_ts - Add support for Device Tree booting
Now we can register the BU21013_ts touch screen when booting with
Device Tree enabled. Here we parse all the necessary components
previously
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 08:57:31AM +, Lee Jones wrote:
I applied these 3 patches, but for DT we also need to specify compatible
ID and set up of_match_table pointer.
Why do you need a compatible string?
The I2C subsystem guesses at a compatible string by default but it's
much better
Hi Lee,
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 01:13:10PM +, Lee Jones wrote:
> Now we can register the BU21013_ts touch screen when booting with
> Device Tree enabled. Here we parse all the necessary components
> previously expected to be passed from platform data.
I applied these 3 patches, but for DT we
Now we can register the BU21013_ts touch screen when booting with
Device Tree enabled. Here we parse all the necessary components
previously expected to be passed from platform data.
Cc: Dmitry Torokhov
Cc: linux-in...@vger.kernel.org
Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann
Acked-by: Linus Walleij
Now we can register the BU21013_ts touch screen when booting with
Device Tree enabled. Here we parse all the necessary components
previously expected to be passed from platform data.
Cc: Dmitry Torokhov dmitry.torok...@gmail.com
Cc: linux-in...@vger.kernel.org
Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann
Hi Lee,
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 01:13:10PM +, Lee Jones wrote:
Now we can register the BU21013_ts touch screen when booting with
Device Tree enabled. Here we parse all the necessary components
previously expected to be passed from platform data.
I applied these 3 patches, but for DT we
18 matches
Mail list logo
