SEARCH  

NEWS

2010.10.06:11:36:28
Najpopularniejsze domeny dla Twojej firmy w nazwa.pl (reklama)
Myślisz o zdobyciu zagranicznych rynków? Chcesz mieć adresy WWW w najbardziej rozpoznawalnych domenach? A może chciałbyś zabezpieczyć swoją markę przed wykorzystaniem jej przez kogoś innego? Powinieneś więc rozważyć rejestrację firmowych adresów WWW zawierających najpopularniejsze rozszerzenia używane na świecie.

 

141927614238_593960007529Rob Emanuele
Hi Haavard, Id be happy to reintegrate my changes to this back into the Atmel driver once I get it working correct on the at91. Do you have the equipment to give my changes a try? Converting my #d

 
152924954852_582360007119Rob Emanuele
Rob Emanuele : Greetings, This patch creates a new AT91 Multimedia Card Interface (MCI) driver that supports using both MCI slots at the same time. Im looking for others to test this patc

 
176027304216_567060007805Harikrishna Donti
Signed-off-by: Michael Roth <mroth@xxxxxxxxx Cc: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@xxxxxxxxx --- arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/board.h | 1 + drivers/mmc/host/at91_mci.c | 4 +

 
110924924975_509860007649Harikrishna Donti
Harikrishna Donti wrote: I have taken enough care in my driver not to call spi_sync() more than once at a time by a mutex lock. Still I dont understand why the overrun would occur. Im unfa

 
119220394581_519860007201Valentin Longchamp
Harikrishna Donti wrote: When I start an application which uses UART1-5 (i.e., data tx,rx in UART which also uses DMA) then I get SPI overrun errors. So, seems like there is some kind of DMA

 
153826154963_577660007714Valentin Longchamp
Harikrishna Donti wrote: When I start an application which uses UART1-5 (i.e., data tx,rx in UART which also uses DMA) then I get SPI overrun errors. So, seems like there is some kind of DMA

 
130520824209_515760007360Paulius Zaleckas
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 04:46:21PM +0200, Valentin Longchamp wrote: changes since v1: we now check if the parent configuration bit was changed since reset and change the parent when needed.

 
127726654089_549360007449Paulius Zaleckas
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 04:46:21PM +0200, Valentin Longchamp wrote: changes since v1: we now check if the parent configuration bit was changed since reset and change the parent when needed.

 
129824444941_527260007151Russell King ARM Li
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 05:07:34PM +0300, Paulius Zaleckas wrote: Please pull the following minor fixes/changes (diff attached inline): This appears to have missed Linus pull of my tree, so Im goi

 
192227344190_550260007386Russell King ARM Li
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 05:07:34PM +0300, Paulius Zaleckas wrote: Please pull the following minor fixes/changes (diff attached inline): This appears to have missed Linus pull of my tree, so Im goi

 
170424714001_566660007556Russell King ARM Li
Hi All, I have been trying to change the cache policy to write allocate for both user and kernel memory (i.e normal memory). I changed the cachepolicy variable in arch/arm/mm/mmu.c, but seems like

 
138025524638_558960007543Russell King ARM Li
Hi All, I have been trying to change the cache policy to write allocate for both user and kernel memory (i.e normal memory). I changed the cachepolicy variable in arch/arm/mm/mmu.c, but seems like

 
195029874208_503860007544luan dinh
----- Original Message ----- From: "Russell King - ARM Linux" <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Cachepolicy question On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 06:46:31PM +0530, Hemanth V wrote:

 
148727784988_542860007530luan dinh
----- Original Message ----- From: "Russell King - ARM Linux" <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Cachepolicy question On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 06:46:31PM +0530, Hemanth V wrote:

 
157929724264_577060007196Grant Likely
Hi, All Currently, ARM linux uses mach-type to figure out platform. But mach-type could not handle variants well and it doesnt tell the kernel about info about attached peripherals. The device-tree

 
115521774668_515760007915Grant Likely
Hi, All Currently, ARM linux uses mach-type to figure out platform. But mach-type could not handle variants well and it doesnt tell the kernel about info about attached peripherals. The device-tree

 
171322234467_535160007176Robert Schwebel
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 9:27 AM, Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: Signed-off-by: janboe <yuan-bo.ye@xxxxxxxxxxxx Heeheehe, This is Fantastic. Yes, I agree. Thanks for

 
189527624162_510260007642Robert Schwebel
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 9:27 AM, Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: Signed-off-by: janboe <yuan-bo.ye@xxxxxxxxxxxx Heeheehe, This is Fantastic. Yes, I agree. Thanks for

 
164622874420_563460007469Robert Schwebel
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 9:05 AM, Robert Schwebel <r.schwebel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: Seriously: oftree in general is a good idea. Just that it doesnt work in practise. The concept has some seri

 
116322944441_542860007915Robert Schwebel
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 9:05 AM, Robert Schwebel <r.schwebel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: Seriously: oftree in general is a good idea. Just that it doesnt work in practise. The concept has some seri

 
162522194091_529260007935Robert Schwebel
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Robert Schwebel <r.schwebel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: That being said, the problems we have had are the reason why it is *not* recommended to hard link the dev

 
120720894157_567560007970Robert Schwebel
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Robert Schwebel <r.schwebel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: That being said, the problems we have had are the reason why it is *not* recommended to hard link the dev

 
185123344731_501360007531Grant Likely
From: Robert Schwebel <r.schwebel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 01:48:01 +0200 My impression is that oftree only works in a perfect world. But we dont have one, so the fundamental de

 
165620834819_507560007534Grant Likely
From: Robert Schwebel <r.schwebel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 01:48:01 +0200 My impression is that oftree only works in a perfect world. But we dont have one, so the fundamental de

 
154528814829_598660007892David Miller
Robert Schwebel wrote: The oftree by design wants to be a complete hardware description. As you mention above, there are cases where you *nevertheless* need ad-hoc information about things *not

 
190129334111_599260007488David Miller
Robert Schwebel wrote: The oftree by design wants to be a complete hardware description. As you mention above, there are cases where you *nevertheless* need ad-hoc information about things *not

 
192624324578_508260007017David Miller
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 06:58:24PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: Robert Schwebel wrote: The oftree by design wants to be a complete hardware description. As you mention above, there are cases wher

 
105229584352_578360007790David Miller
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 06:58:24PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: Robert Schwebel wrote: The oftree by design wants to be a complete hardware description. As you mention above, there are cases wher

 
131426284873_513260007590Grant Likely
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 05:15:25PM -0700, David Miller wrote: From: Robert Schwebel <r.schwebel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx It works badly for corner cases, and embedded land is full of it. The eff

 
166622484471_549460007780Grant Likely
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 05:15:25PM -0700, David Miller wrote: From: Robert Schwebel <r.schwebel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx It works badly for corner cases, and embedded land is full of it. The eff

 
138621344713_549760007939Benjamin Herrenschmi
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 04:32:40PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote: and half-assed example of this). However, when it comes to complex configurations that cannot be easily described, Im all for using

 
198620514370_556360007477Benjamin Herrenschmi
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 04:32:40PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote: and half-assed example of this). However, when it comes to complex configurations that cannot be easily described, Im all for using

 
158121864435_593360007407Mark Brown
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 07:52:46PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: Sure. My only big concern with it is that it compeltely sidesteps clocking decisions so theres a lot of codecs its

 
172322834034_559560007738Mark Brown
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 07:52:46PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: Sure. My only big concern with it is that it compeltely sidesteps clocking decisions so theres a lot of codecs its

 
118520814986_565760007220Mark Brown
1. implementers of the clock API which have not been subject to my rigorous review abuse it to the point of making the API essentially useless, and that causes Mark problems. If thats a proble

 
143629624354_514960007480Mark Brown
1. implementers of the clock API which have not been subject to my rigorous review abuse it to the point of making the API essentially useless, and that causes Mark problems. If thats a proble

 
108724444531_545860007666Wolfgang Denk
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 6:07 PM, Robert Schwebel <r.schwebel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 06:58:24PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: Robert Schwebel wrote: The oftree by design

 
193625884853_537060007822Wolfgang Denk
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 6:07 PM, Robert Schwebel <r.schwebel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 06:58:24PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: Robert Schwebel wrote: The oftree by design

 
177822434105_581260007521Robert Schwebel
From: Wolfgang Denk <wd@xxxxxxx Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 11:51:26 +0200 Lost business. D*mn... [Maybe this explains Roberts reluctance?] ROFL -------------------------------------------------

 
155020234603_553660007179Robert Schwebel
From: Wolfgang Denk <wd@xxxxxxx Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 11:51:26 +0200 Lost business. D*mn... [Maybe this explains Roberts reluctance?] ROFL -------------------------------------------------

 
175621164140_510960007600Robert Schwebel
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 6:13 AM, Robert Schwebel <r.schwebel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 11:51:26AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote: True. From a commercial point of view this i

 
158923534043_512060007050Grant Likely
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 02:07:07AM +0200, Robert Schwebel wrote: On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 06:58:24PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: Robert Schwebel wrote: The oftree by design wants to be a compl

 
178627474639_563860007158Grant Likely
Dear Robert Schwebel, In message <20090528000707.GR6805@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx you wrote: Until now, oftree has created more problems than it has solved for us. The idea works fine for well-known

 
146028954402_556660007240Alexander Clouter
-----Original Message----- From: devicetree-discuss-bounces+stephen.neuendorffer=xilinx.com@xxxxxxxxxx [ rel="nofollow" mailto:devicetree- mailto:devicetree- discuss-bounces+stephen.neuen

 
108722564263_569160007944Alexander Clouter
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 12:56 PM, Alexander Clouter <alex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: In gmane.linux.kernel Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 9:05 AM, Rober

 
187025474060_500960007327Scott Wood
"Robert" == Robert Schwebel <r.schwebel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes: Hi, Robert - The whole concept is based on the assumption that bindings Robert are defined *once*, then never

 
161022464680_565460007491Grant Likely
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 11:23:29AM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: That removes the ability to use the device tree to pass information from the bootloader, such as MAC addresses and clock frequencies.

 
170421524238_534260007355Jon Smirl
Russell King wrote: On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 11:23:29AM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: That removes the ability to use the device tree to pass information from the bootloader, such as MAC addresse

 
150122504249_590360007957JeanChristophe PLAGN
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 03:13:55PM -0400, Jon Smirl wrote: On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 3:08 PM, Scott Wood <scottwood@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: Im not talking about platform specific code, Im talkin

 
114329044213_540660007004JeanChristophe PLAGN
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: On 20:21 Wed 27 May     , Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 03