On 2014-05-29 12:37, Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
On Tue, 2014-05-27 at 14:27 +0200, David Henningsson wrote:
On 2014-05-06 13:59, Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
On Tue, 2014-04-29 at 17:29 +0200, David Henningsson wrote:
On 2014-04-29 15:22, David Henningsson wrote:
We assume it's an srchannel memblock
On Tue, 2014-05-27 at 14:27 +0200, David Henningsson wrote:
On 2014-05-06 13:59, Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
On Tue, 2014-04-29 at 17:29 +0200, David Henningsson wrote:
On 2014-04-29 15:22, David Henningsson wrote:
We assume it's an srchannel memblock if it is writable and does not come
from
On 2014-05-06 13:59, Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
On Tue, 2014-04-29 at 17:29 +0200, David Henningsson wrote:
On 2014-04-29 15:22, David Henningsson wrote:
We assume it's an srchannel memblock if it is writable and does not come
from our own mempool.
In a future implementation, maybe we can have
On Tue, 2014-04-29 at 17:29 +0200, David Henningsson wrote:
On 2014-04-29 15:22, David Henningsson wrote:
We assume it's an srchannel memblock if it is writable and does not come
from our own mempool.
In a future implementation, maybe we can have more than one
srchannel open at the
On 2014-04-29 15:22, David Henningsson wrote:
We assume it's an srchannel memblock if it is writable and does not come
from our own mempool.
In a future implementation, maybe we can have more than one
srchannel open at the same time, but at this point we only
support one.
Signed-off-by:
