On Mon, 16 Sept 2024 at 11:47, Vaishnav Achath wrote:
>
> Hi Prasad,
>
> On 13/09/24 13:02, Prasad Kummari wrote:
> > Added LMB API to prevent SF command from overwriting reserved
> > memory areas. The current SPI code does not use LMB APIs for
> > loading data into memory addresses. To resolve th
On Mon, 16 Sept 2024 at 11:34, Vaishnav Achath wrote:
>
> Hi Sughosh
>
> On 26/08/24 17:29, Sughosh Ganu wrote:
> > The current LMB API's for allocating and reserving memory use a
> > per-caller based memory view. Memory allocated by a caller can then be
> > overwritten by another caller. Make the
Hi Prasad,
On 13/09/24 13:02, Prasad Kummari wrote:
Added LMB API to prevent SF command from overwriting reserved
memory areas. The current SPI code does not use LMB APIs for
loading data into memory addresses. To resolve this, LMB APIs
were added to check the load address of an SF command and e
Hi Sughosh
On 26/08/24 17:29, Sughosh Ganu wrote:
The current LMB API's for allocating and reserving memory use a
per-caller based memory view. Memory allocated by a caller can then be
overwritten by another caller. Make these allocations and reservations
persistent using the alloced list data s
Please also consider to update the brcmnand_get_sector_size_1k code based
on
change in the linux driver so we can keep them consistent as much as
possible.
> -Original Message-
> From: Linus Walleij
> Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2024 12:11 AM
> To: u-boot@lists.denx.de; Dario Binacchi
The reserved memory region in fs_read() is not being
freed after read, free that. The issue was uncovered by
commit ed17a33fed29 ("lmb: make LMB memory map persistent and global")
as now the region used to load from fs cannot be reused by other
loaders like tftp, wget which use lmb_get_free_size()
> -Original Message-
> From: Linus Walleij
> Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2024 12:11 AM
> To: u-boot@lists.denx.de; Dario Binacchi
> ; Michael Trimarchi
> ; Anand Gore
> ; William Zhang
> ; Kursad Oney
> ; Philippe Reynes
>
> Cc: Linus Walleij ; David Regan
> ; Miquel Raynal
> Subject:
> -Original Message-
> From: Linus Walleij
> Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2024 12:11 AM
> To: u-boot@lists.denx.de; Dario Binacchi
> ; Michael Trimarchi
> ; Anand Gore
> ; William Zhang
> ; Kursad Oney
> ; Philippe Reynes
>
> Cc: Linus Walleij ; Florian Fainelli
> ; Kamal Dasu
> ; David
> -Original Message-
> From: Linus Walleij
> Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2024 1:16 AM
> To: William Zhang
> Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de; Dario Binacchi
> ; Michael Trimarchi
> ; Anand Gore
> ; Kursad Oney
> ; Philippe Reynes
> ; Florian Fainelli
> ; Miquel Raynal
> ; Kamal Dasu ;
> David R
Update J722S Resource Management configs to the latest output
generated by K3 Resource Partitioning tool. Main change includes
allocating more BCDMA channels to A53 for CSI2RX to support
4 x CSIRX capture instance simultaneously.
Signed-off-by: Vaishnav Achath
---
Test logs (CSI capture + RM con
On Sun, Sep 15, 2024 at 07:00:08PM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> On 8/26/24 18:39, Tom Rini wrote:
> > The previous wording on the paragraph about what branch to use when
> > submitting patches did not reflect how / when the next branch is
> > currently used. Reword this to note that master s
On Sun, Sep 15, 2024 at 07:57:19PM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> On 8/26/24 21:59, Tom Rini wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 01:12:16PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
> > > Hi Tom,
> > >
> > > On Mon, 26 Aug 2024 at 12:23, Tom Rini wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 11:58:54AM -06
On Sun, Sep 15, 2024 at 07:00:08PM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> On 8/26/24 18:39, Tom Rini wrote:
> > The previous wording on the paragraph about what branch to use when
> > submitting patches did not reflect how / when the next branch is
> > currently used. Reword this to note that master s
On Sun, Sep 15, 2024 at 12:19:29PM -0600, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 15, 2024 at 07:00:08PM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> > On 8/26/24 18:39, Tom Rini wrote:
> > > The previous wording on the paragraph about what branch to use when
> > > submitting patches did not reflect how / when the ne
On 8/26/24 21:59, Tom Rini wrote:
On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 01:12:16PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Tom,
On Mon, 26 Aug 2024 at 12:23, Tom Rini wrote:
On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 11:58:54AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Caleb,
On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 at 17:03, Caleb Connolly wrote:
Hi Simon,
As
On 8/26/24 18:39, Tom Rini wrote:
The previous wording on the paragraph about what branch to use when
submitting patches did not reflect how / when the next branch is
currently used. Reword this to note that master should be used for bug
and regression fixes, always, and that next should be used
On Tue, 03 Sep 2024 19:09:41 +0200, Francis Laniel wrote:
> With this series, I bumped the new hush to get the latest commits from
> upstream.
>
> Also, I added back a reverted commit which goal was to fix a bad behavior in
> old hush test.
> I had to tweak a bit this commit, but everything work
On 12.09.2024 03:59, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Mikhail,
>
> On Mon, 9 Sept 2024 at 16:27, Mikhail Kshevetskiy
> wrote:
>> This patch adds downloading/uploading of data with netcat.
>> Client/server mode both supported.
>>
>> How to test:
>>
>> netcat-openbsd=1.219-1 from debian were
18 matches
Mail list logo
