On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 10:38:27 +0800
Peter Pan wrote:
> >>
> >> Again, I'm sorry that you had to be the one supporting this transition,
> >> but I don't want to introduce any more quick-and-dirty hacks that we'll
> >> have to maintain until someone decides to tackle the real problem.
> >
> > No s
Hi Boris,
On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 9:03 AM, Peter Pan wrote:
> Hi Boris,
>
> Firstly, sorry for late reply.
>
> On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 4:33 AM, Boris Brezillon
> wrote:
>> Hi Peter,
>>
>> On Wed, 4 May 2016 09:36:05 +0800
>> Peter Pan wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Boris,
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 3:34
Hi Boris,
Firstly, sorry for late reply.
On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 4:33 AM, Boris Brezillon
wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> On Wed, 4 May 2016 09:36:05 +0800
> Peter Pan wrote:
>
>> Hi Boris,
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Boris Brezillon
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Peter,
>> >
>> > On Tue, 19 Apr 2016 08:4
Hi Peter,
On Wed, 4 May 2016 09:36:05 +0800
Peter Pan wrote:
> Hi Boris,
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Boris Brezillon
> wrote:
> > Hi Peter,
> >
> > On Tue, 19 Apr 2016 08:40:40 +0800
> > Peter Pan wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >> So it's true, it
> >> >> should still be numchips in n
Hi Boris,
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Boris Brezillon
wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> On Tue, 19 Apr 2016 08:40:40 +0800
> Peter Pan wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >> So it's true, it
>> >> should still be numchips in nand_bbt.c? I just came out this question
>> >> when
>> >> making v4. :)
>> >
>> > BTW, I hav
Hi Peter,
On Tue, 19 Apr 2016 08:40:40 +0800
Peter Pan wrote:
>
> >
> >> So it's true, it
> >> should still be numchips in nand_bbt.c? I just came out this question when
> >> making v4. :)
> >
> > BTW, I have something for you [1]. I started to move things around to
> > allow spinand and onenan
Hi Boris,
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Boris Brezillon
wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> On Mon, 18 Apr 2016 14:22:09 +0800
> Peter Pan wrote:
>
>> Hi Boris,
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 4:35 PM, Boris Brezillon
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Peter,
>> >
>> > On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 02:47:55 +
>> > Peter Pan wr
Hi Peter,
On Mon, 18 Apr 2016 14:22:09 +0800
Peter Pan wrote:
> Hi Boris,
>
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 4:35 PM, Boris Brezillon
> wrote:
> > Hi Peter,
> >
> > On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 02:47:55 +
> > Peter Pan wrote:
> >
> >> From: Brian Norris
> >>
> >> Currently nand_bbt.c is tied with struc
Hi Boris,
On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 4:35 PM, Boris Brezillon
wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 02:47:55 +
> Peter Pan wrote:
>
>> From: Brian Norris
>>
>> Currently nand_bbt.c is tied with struct nand_chip, and it makes other
>> NAND family chips hard to use nand_bbt.c. Maybe it's t
On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 16:09:44 +0800
Peter Pan wrote:
> Hi Boris,
>
> Firstly, thanks a lot for taking time to review my patches.
>
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 4:35 PM, Boris Brezillon
> wrote:
> > Hi Peter,
> >
> > On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 02:47:55 +
> > Peter Pan wrote:
> >
> >> From: Brian Norr
Hi Boris,
Firstly, thanks a lot for taking time to review my patches.
On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 4:35 PM, Boris Brezillon
wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 02:47:55 +
> Peter Pan wrote:
>
>> From: Brian Norris
>>
>> Currently nand_bbt.c is tied with struct nand_chip, and it makes oth
Hi Peter,
On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 02:47:55 +
Peter Pan wrote:
> From: Brian Norris
>
> Currently nand_bbt.c is tied with struct nand_chip, and it makes other
> NAND family chips hard to use nand_bbt.c. Maybe it's the reason why
> onenand has own bbt(onenand_bbt.c).
>
> Separate struct nand_ch
12 matches
Mail list logo
