On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 6:29 AM, Loic PALLARDY wrote:
> Hi Vaibhav,
>
> On 01/09/2013 01:11 PM, Bedia, Vaibhav wrote:
>> Hi Loic,
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 16:23:24, Loic PALLARDY wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12/21/2012 11:49 AM, Bedia, Vaibhav wrote:
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 14:24:26, Loic PALLAR
On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 17:59:39, Loic PALLARDY wrote:
> Hi Vaibhav,
>
> On 01/09/2013 01:11 PM, Bedia, Vaibhav wrote:
> > Hi Loic,
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 16:23:24, Loic PALLARDY wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 12/21/2012 11:49 AM, Bedia, Vaibhav wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 14:24:26, Lo
Hi Vaibhav,
On 01/09/2013 01:11 PM, Bedia, Vaibhav wrote:
> Hi Loic,
>
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 16:23:24, Loic PALLARDY wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 12/21/2012 11:49 AM, Bedia, Vaibhav wrote:
>>> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 14:24:26, Loic PALLARDY wrote:
>>> I have a few patches which are dependent on thi
Hi Loic,
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 16:23:24, Loic PALLARDY wrote:
>
>
> On 12/21/2012 11:49 AM, Bedia, Vaibhav wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 14:24:26, Loic PALLARDY wrote:
> >>
> > I have a few patches which are dependent on this patch series.
> > Could you please keep me in cc for the future
On 12/21/2012 11:49 AM, Bedia, Vaibhav wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 14:24:26, Loic PALLARDY wrote:
>>
> I have a few patches which are dependent on this patch series.
> Could you please keep me in cc for the future versions.
>
Sure, I'll.
/Loic
> Thanks,
> Vaibhav--
To unsubscribe from this
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 14:24:26, Loic PALLARDY wrote:
>
>
> On 12/18/2012 05:59 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > * Loic Pallardy [121218 05:15]:
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Omar Ramirez Luna
> >
> > AFAIK the first two patches should have:
> > From: Omar Ramirez Luna
> Yes right, my mistake.
> I'll fi
On 12/18/2012 05:59 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Loic Pallardy [121218 05:15]:
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Omar Ramirez Luna
>
> AFAIK the first two patches should have:
> From: Omar Ramirez Luna
Yes right, my mistake.
I'll fix that on next version.
/Loic
>
> Once that's fixed, for arch/arm/*omap*/* pa
* Loic Pallardy [121218 05:15]:
> Actually moving it from plat-omap, as this framework/driver code is
> supposed to be under drivers/ folder. The framework should work with
> the current supported OMAP processors (OMAP1+) that have mailbox and
> can be used as a method of interprocessor communicat
Actually moving it from plat-omap, as this framework/driver code is
supposed to be under drivers/ folder. The framework should work with
the current supported OMAP processors (OMAP1+) that have mailbox and
can be used as a method of interprocessor communication.
The mailbox hardware (in OMAP) uses
