If he shall survive his eccentricities of diet that long. He was an
omnivorous buyer, picking up everything he could lay his h
<>--
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simpli
On Wed, 2 Sep 2009 08:53:16 -0700 David Brownell wrote:
> On Tuesday 01 September 2009, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 20:21:11 -0700
> > David Brownell wrote:
> >
> > > From: Tero Kristo
> > >
> > > Previous restore was lazy and only restored CHxCONF when it was needed by
> >
On Wed, 2 Sep 2009 08:47:18 -0700 David Brownell wrote:
> On Tuesday 01 September 2009, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > +#define
> > > busy_wait(cond)\
> > > +__({__
On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 08:47 -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> On Tuesday 01 September 2009, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > +#define busy_wait(cond)
> > > \
> > > + ({ \
> > > + unsign
On Tuesday 01 September 2009, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 20:21:11 -0700
> David Brownell wrote:
>
> > From: Tero Kristo
> >
> > Previous restore was lazy and only restored CHxCONF when it was needed by a
> > specific chip select. This could cause occasional errors on an SPI bus
On Tuesday 01 September 2009, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > +#define
> > busy_wait(cond) \
> > + ({ \
> > + unsigned long end_jiffies = jiffies + STMP_SPI_TIMEOUT; \
> > +
David Brownell wrote:
> It's good policy to include a brief GPL statement at the top
> of every source file too, including a Copyright (C) you.
>
I think "good policy" is probably understating things a bit. :)
b.g.
--
Bill Gatliff
b...@billgatliff.com
---
On Tue 1 Sep 2009 23:17, Song, Barry pondered:
> No. I can't agree other coding style issues you said. I will keep my
> original codes for these issues except adding a BUS_SPI.
style is different than performance
Did you think about Mike's comment - I think it was a performance issue he was
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 05:50, Robin Getz wrote:
> On Tue 1 Sep 2009 23:17, Song, Barry pondered:
>> No. I can't agree other coding style issues you said. I will keep my
>> original codes for these issues except adding a BUS_SPI.
>
> style is different than performance
>
> Did you think about Mi
On Wednesday 02 September 2009, Barry Song wrote:
> David,
> I am really surprised the kmalloc memory can keep DMA-safe.
Then you need to internalize more of the docs on the DMA
calls ... :)
Notably see in Documentation/DMA-mapping.txt the section up top
where it describes what memory can be used
>-Original Message-
>From: Barry Song [mailto:21cn...@gmail.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 3:52 PM
>To: David Brownell
>Cc: Song, Barry; Mike Frysinger;
>dbrown...@users.sourceforge.net; d...@mail.ru;
>dmitry.torok...@gmail.com;
>spi-devel-general@lists.sourceforge.net;
>
David,
I am really surprised the kmalloc memory can keep DMA-safe. Check the
code, no matter spi_write_then_read and spi_init, they only get memory
by a simple
kmalloc(SPI_BUFSIZ, GFP_KERNEL);
I can't find map_single or dma coherent operations at all. So did I
lose something?
Thanks
Barry
On 9/2/0
12 matches
Mail list logo
