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.

 

116922254891_548660007283Rob 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

 
128023544910_527760007500Rob 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

 
102925504397_508460007265Harikrishna 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 +

 
152426994893_544060007100Harikrishna 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

 
191721494544_559160007346Valentin 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

 
192825474572_581860007327Valentin 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

 
110023134681_501060007835Paulius 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.

 
151026204385_590860007354Paulius 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.

 
117222284053_506560007244Russell 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

 
116625854394_571160007772Russell 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

 
105721034319_562960007352Russell 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

 
195620214665_563760007256Russell 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

 
147125414876_585660007579luan 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:

 
121026214808_526360007476luan 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:

 
150828534060_590260007236Grant 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

 
167426204340_599360007260Grant 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

 
134522054282_500960007313Robert 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

 
126523124855_514160007303Robert 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

 
172123794924_552860007610Robert 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

 
100321504462_506460007024Robert 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

 
130127264645_564260007894Robert 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

 
190320634099_518460007941Robert 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

 
149723384253_535160007422Grant 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

 
165422004801_557760007443Grant 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

 
118727324593_564960007645David 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

 
167420984371_531960007089David 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

 
121326424152_531260007225David 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

 
125223224564_550660007043David 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

 
192823274244_572860007972Grant 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

 
117120924704_576460007500Grant 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

 
140924154598_578160007337Benjamin 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

 
187029474980_502260007805Benjamin 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

 
124825114127_581360007802Mark 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

 
185729454129_510060007034Mark 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

 
107128444126_577560007868Mark 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

 
127520174282_587460007016Mark 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

 
121026684964_519060007222Wolfgang 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

 
199629394733_512260007750Wolfgang 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

 
192526074695_505360007367Robert 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 -------------------------------------------------

 
108727794211_521360007819Robert 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 -------------------------------------------------

 
108028294836_536360007634Robert 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

 
138029134301_534360007991Grant 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

 
156520984930_529760007680Grant 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

 
104721454286_574260007994Alexander Clouter
-----Original Message----- From: devicetree-discuss-bounces+stephen.neuendorffer=xilinx.com@xxxxxxxxxx [ rel="nofollow" mailto:devicetree- mailto:devicetree- discuss-bounces+stephen.neuen

 
110922864773_532060007326Alexander 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

 
113925814155_597660007858Scott 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

 
160923234771_591060007874Grant 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.

 
190122314973_583060007194Jon 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

 
151025764339_579660007538JeanChristophe 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

 
179024284825_556260007324JeanChristophe 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