On Tuesday 25 September 2012, sebastien requiem wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Tuesday 25 September 2012, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >> On Tuesday 25 September 2012, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> >> > > Regarding mv78xx0, I agree that I'm not sure what to do. The number o
On Tuesday 25 September 2012, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 25 September 2012, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > > Regarding mv78xx0, I agree that I'm not sure what to do. The number of
> > > supported platforms is small. Should we simply mark mv78xx0 deprecated
> > > now, wait a few release cycles to see
On Tuesday 25 September 2012, Arnaud Patard wrote:
> Arnd Bergmann writes:
> >
> > The next step would be to label mach-orion5x as deprecated in Kconfig for
> > a release and change the help text so it tells people to move to mach-mvebu
> > and submit dts files.
> >
>
> You seem to imply that eve
Arnd Bergmann writes:
Hi,
> On Tuesday 25 September 2012, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 12:14:39PM +0200, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
>> > On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 11:46:10 +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> >
>> > > I principle, i agree. However, i'm not too sure about mach-orion5x &
>> > > m
On Tuesday 25 September 2012, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 12:14:39PM +0200, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> > On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 11:46:10 +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> >
> > > I principle, i agree. However, i'm not too sure about mach-orion5x &
> > > mach-mv78xx0. orion5x has probably be
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 12:14:39PM +0200, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> Dear Andrew Lunn,
>
> On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 11:46:10 +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>
> > I principle, i agree. However, i'm not too sure about mach-orion5x &
> > mach-mv78xx0. orion5x has probably been broken since -rc1 was released
>
Dear Andrew Lunn,
On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 11:46:10 +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> I principle, i agree. However, i'm not too sure about mach-orion5x &
> mach-mv78xx0. orion5x has probably been broken since -rc1 was released
> and nobody noticed. In the same time, we got around 5 people
> independently r
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 11:18:26AM +0200, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> Dear Sebastian Hesselbarth,
>
> On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 11:11:42 +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
>
> > I didn't try to post all the dove on mach-mvebu patches in the current
> > release cycle, because mach-mvebu is still evolving
Dear Sebastian Hesselbarth,
On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 11:11:42 +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
> I didn't try to post all the dove on mach-mvebu patches in the current
> release cycle, because mach-mvebu is still evolving to fast for me to keep
> up with my limited spare time. But I have dove runni
On 09/25/2012 07:35 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 02:02:17AM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
The watchdog on dove requires an interrupt that is not yet
available on DT. Therefore, the watchdog DT node is removed
until the corresponding chained intc is available.
Just for m
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 02:02:17AM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
> The watchdog on dove requires an interrupt that is not yet
> available on DT. Therefore, the watchdog DT node is removed
> until the corresponding chained intc is available.
Hi Sebastian
Just for my understanding: Is the pro
11 matches
Mail list logo
