On Thu, 2007-10-18 at 14:09 -0500, Linas Vepstas wrote:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 11:27:23AM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
It does what pci_device_to_OF_node() does, but in the right way.
The plan is to remove pci_device_to_OF_node() once all the callers have
been converted to
So Ben suggested what we really want is two routines,
of_get_pci_dev_node() and of_peek_pci_dev_node() - the former returning
a refcounted copy and the latter allowing you to peek at the
device_node as long as you own the pci_dev.
I'm not sure it's worth the churn really, so we should
On Tue, 2007-10-23 at 23:54 +1000, Julian Calaby wrote:
So, my queries:
1. Has anyone seen this card (or any similar to it) before?
2. Is there any remote possibility that you could tell me what it
does? / what it's useful for?
It's a multifunction data acquisition card. A fair amount of
On 10/24/07, Tom spot Callaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2007-10-23 at 23:54 +1000, Julian Calaby wrote:
So, my queries:
1. Has anyone seen this card (or any similar to it) before?
2. Is there any remote possibility that you could tell me what it
does? / what it's useful for?
On Tue, 2007-10-23 at 00:10 +0100, Martin Habets wrote:
Here's a summary of the Linux Test Project run on
the latest sparc git tree. I'm focussing on the blocking
tests first, but it's slow going.
Test systems:
palantir9 SS20, 2x ROSS Hypersparc, 320MB
palantir13SS10, 2x
Looks like the MAP_FIXED case is using the wrong address hint. I'd expect
the comment don't mess with it means pass the request straight on through,
not change the address requested to -ENOMEM.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
BTW, just noticed by random code inspection,
From: Chris Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 15:50:38 -0700
Looks like the MAP_FIXED case is using the wrong address hint. I'd expect
the comment don't mess with it means pass the request straight on through,
not change the address requested to -ENOMEM.
Signed-off-by:
