On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 07:41:01PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 04, 2017 at 08:57:22PM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > Falling back unconditionally to HostNotify as primary client's interrupt
> > breaks some drivers which alter their functionality depending on whether
> > interrupt is
On Wed, Jan 04, 2017 at 08:57:22PM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> Falling back unconditionally to HostNotify as primary client's interrupt
> breaks some drivers which alter their functionality depending on whether
> interrupt is present or not, so let's introduce a board flag telling I2C
> core ex
On Wed, Jan 04, 2017 at 08:57:22PM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> Falling back unconditionally to HostNotify as primary client's interrupt
> breaks some drivers which alter their functionality depending on whether
> interrupt is present or not, so let's introduce a board flag telling I2C
> core ex
On Wednesday 04 January 2017 20:57:22 Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> Falling back unconditionally to HostNotify as primary client's interrupt
> breaks some drivers which alter their functionality depending on whether
> interrupt is present or not, so let's introduce a board flag telling I2C
> core explic
Falling back unconditionally to HostNotify as primary client's interrupt
breaks some drivers which alter their functionality depending on whether
interrupt is present or not, so let's introduce a board flag telling I2C
core explicitly if we want wired interrupt or HostNotify-based one:
I2C_CLIENT_H
5 matches
Mail list logo