On 01/03/2017 02:58 AM, Sekhar Nori wrote:
On Monday 02 January 2017 01:34 PM, Sekhar Nori wrote:
On Saturday 31 December 2016 06:22 AM, David Lechner wrote:
On 08/10/2016 06:00 AM, Karl Beldan wrote:
Many davinci boards (da830 and da850 families) don't have their clocks
in DT yet and won't be
On Monday 02 January 2017 01:34 PM, Sekhar Nori wrote:
> On Saturday 31 December 2016 06:22 AM, David Lechner wrote:
>> On 08/10/2016 06:00 AM, Karl Beldan wrote:
>>> Many davinci boards (da830 and da850 families) don't have their clocks
>>> in DT yet and won't be successful in getting an unnamed a
On Saturday 31 December 2016 06:22 AM, David Lechner wrote:
> On 08/10/2016 06:00 AM, Karl Beldan wrote:
>> Many davinci boards (da830 and da850 families) don't have their clocks
>> in DT yet and won't be successful in getting an unnamed aemif clock
>> without explicitly registering them via clk_lo
On 08/10/2016 06:00 AM, Karl Beldan wrote:
Many davinci boards (da830 and da850 families) don't have their clocks
in DT yet and won't be successful in getting an unnamed aemif clock
without explicitly registering them via clk_lookups, failing the
ti-aemif memory driver probe.
The current aemif l
Many davinci boards (da830 and da850 families) don't have their clocks
in DT yet and won't be successful in getting an unnamed aemif clock
without explicitly registering them via clk_lookups, failing the
ti-aemif memory driver probe.
The current aemif lookup entry resolving to the same clock:
5 matches
Mail list logo