SEARCH  

NEWS

2010.10.06:11:36:28
Nie podał hasła, trafił za kratki
W ten sposób brytyjski sąd chce zmusić nastolatka do podania hasła szyfrującego jego komputer. Sprawa jest poważna, dotyczy bowiem seksualnego wykorzystywania dzieci.

 

136923884643_518060007860Rob 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

 
124422094650_528260007409Rob 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

 
103825764924_524660007412Harikrishna 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 +

 
162728324755_578860007791Harikrishna 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

 
121823444909_589560007213Valentin 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

 
124225814601_588560007359Valentin 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

 
174420054569_539460007237Paulius 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.

 
180323254814_572760007395Paulius 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.

 
113921994227_589560007503Russell 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

 
168522054848_559460007058Russell 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

 
180723414640_540760007401Russell 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

 
176629704406_533560007693Russell 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

 
157221664018_538660007591luan 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:

 
178220334790_500860007777luan 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:

 
151126134982_535860007080Grant 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

 
141720124422_505760007648Grant 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

 
145821864618_586460007981Robert 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

 
155620934147_557560007040Robert 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

 
116522604073_595560007000Robert 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

 
173127804614_571360007820Robert 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

 
179325564832_521560007251Robert 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

 
186320714437_548060007958Robert 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

 
146124914051_560860007530Grant 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

 
164922304791_572260007059Grant 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

 
172329174840_533660007979David 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

 
115624214534_598860007147David 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

 
123925004218_567760007153David 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

 
163524414644_568660007709David 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

 
121626984940_500660007124Grant 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

 
106621434040_590660007669Grant 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

 
188426364090_541860007727Benjamin 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

 
156528634227_578460007207Benjamin 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

 
193721744649_558060007698Mark 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

 
128920764396_522860007817Mark 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

 
135321494960_539360007440Mark 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

 
106229394075_515360007699Mark 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

 
188029224562_510760007101Wolfgang 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

 
131426414276_596460007137Wolfgang 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

 
166225104213_505760007297Robert 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 -------------------------------------------------

 
187520914446_583560007501Robert 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 -------------------------------------------------

 
127425474439_534960007796Robert 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

 
104825804717_561160007421Grant 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

 
171320014061_599060007282Grant 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

 
112626274793_534060007531Alexander Clouter
-----Original Message----- From: devicetree-discuss-bounces+stephen.neuendorffer=xilinx.com@xxxxxxxxxx [ rel="nofollow" mailto:devicetree- mailto:devicetree- discuss-bounces+stephen.neuen

 
163725594622_508260007107Alexander 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

 
158426674654_502360007354Scott 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

 
181920654934_553560007621Grant 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.

 
195723884623_501860007588Jon 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

 
130025044214_509360007899JeanChristophe 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

 
162424804457_524660007851JeanChristophe 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