On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Stefano Babic wrote:
> Hallo Marek,
>
> On 17/06/2013 14:51, Marek Vasut wrote:
>
>>> I am missing something: which is the real advantage to reduce the
>>> console buffer ? I do not think that the saved memory is worth, and on
>>> the other side more elaborated sc
Hallo Marek,
On 17/06/2013 14:51, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> I am missing something: which is the real advantage to reduce the
>> console buffer ? I do not think that the saved memory is worth, and on
>> the other side more elaborated scripts (usings nested if-then-else) are
>> quite long nowadays.
>
Hello Stefano,
I'm CCing Wolfgang,
> Hi Marek,
>
> On 15/06/2013 23:41, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > Using 1024 bytes for console buffer is unnecessarily too much,
> > lower the amount for all MXS boards to 256.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut
> > Cc: Fabio Estevam
> > Cc: Lauri Hintsala
> > Cc
Hi Marek,
On 15/06/2013 23:41, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Using 1024 bytes for console buffer is unnecessarily too much,
> lower the amount for all MXS boards to 256.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut
> Cc: Fabio Estevam
> Cc: Lauri Hintsala
> Cc: Otavio Salvador
> Cc: Stefano Babic
> ---
> include/
Using 1024 bytes for console buffer is unnecessarily too much,
lower the amount for all MXS boards to 256.
Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut
Cc: Fabio Estevam
Cc: Lauri Hintsala
Cc: Otavio Salvador
Cc: Stefano Babic
---
include/configs/mxs.h |2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
5 matches
Mail list logo