On 10/22/24 13:46, Stefan Roese wrote:
On 10/22/24 13:43, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
On Tue, Oct 22 2024, Stefan Roese wrote:
Hi Rasmus,
On 10/2/24 21:23, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
While running a CI build, I'm seeing some sandbox failures, most likely
related to this change here:
https://dev.a
On 10/22/24 13:43, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
On Tue, Oct 22 2024, Stefan Roese wrote:
Hi Rasmus,
On 10/2/24 21:23, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
While running a CI build, I'm seeing some sandbox failures, most likely
related to this change here:
https://dev.azure.com/sr0718/u-boot/_build/results?bu
On Tue, Oct 22 2024, Stefan Roese wrote:
> Hi Rasmus,
>
> On 10/2/24 21:23, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
>
> While running a CI build, I'm seeing some sandbox failures, most likely
> related to this change here:
>
> https://dev.azure.com/sr0718/u-boot/_build/results?buildId=375&view=logs&j=db15d90c-51
Hi Rasmus,
On 10/2/24 21:23, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
Back when I added this driver in commit 2ac8490412c9, I wrote
The corresponding linux driver apparently has support for some
watchdog circuits which can be disabled by tri-stating the gpio, but I
have never actually encountered
On 10/2/24 21:23, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
Back when I added this driver in commit 2ac8490412c9, I wrote
The corresponding linux driver apparently has support for some
watchdog circuits which can be disabled by tri-stating the gpio, but I
have never actually encountered such a chip
Back when I added this driver in commit 2ac8490412c9, I wrote
The corresponding linux driver apparently has support for some
watchdog circuits which can be disabled by tri-stating the gpio, but I
have never actually encountered such a chip in the wild;
That has changed now; I have a b
6 matches
Mail list logo
