On 17 November 2014 at 19:32, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 05:57:43AM +, Simon Glass wrote:
>> Hi Tom,
>>
>> On 17 November 2014 00:46, Tom Rini wrote:
>> >
>> > On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 10:46:20AM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
>> >
>> > > Since we scan from left to right looking for
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 05:57:43AM +, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Tom,
>
> On 17 November 2014 00:46, Tom Rini wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 10:46:20AM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
> >
> > > Since we scan from left to right looking for the first digit, "i2c0"
> > > returns
> > > 2 instead
Hello Simon,
Am 11.11.2014 18:46, schrieb Simon Glass:
Since we scan from left to right looking for the first digit, "i2c0" returns
2 instead of 0 for the alias number. Adjust the code to scan from right to
left instead.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass
---
Changes in v2:
- Add new patch to correct
Hi Tom,
On 17 November 2014 00:46, Tom Rini wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 10:46:20AM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
>
> > Since we scan from left to right looking for the first digit, "i2c0" returns
> > 2 instead of 0 for the alias number. Adjust the code to scan from right to
> > left instead.
>
On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 10:46:20AM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
> Since we scan from left to right looking for the first digit, "i2c0" returns
> 2 instead of 0 for the alias number. Adjust the code to scan from right to
> left instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass
How about i2c10 ? I assume you
Since we scan from left to right looking for the first digit, "i2c0" returns
2 instead of 0 for the alias number. Adjust the code to scan from right to
left instead.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass
---
Changes in v2:
- Add new patch to correct handling of aliases with embedded digits
lib/fdtdec.c |
6 matches
Mail list logo