I'm actually a little embarrassed that I didn't pick that nit myself.. :)
-----Original Message-----
From: David Gibson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Mon 12/3/2007 6:40 PM
To: Stephen Neuendorffer
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [POWERPC] [v2] Improved documentation of device
tree'ranges'.
On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 05:08:57PM -0800, Stephen Neuendorffer wrote:
> I was misled by the prior language. I've attempted to clarify how
> 'ranges' are used, in particular, how to get an identity mapping.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Neuendorffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Acked-by: David Gibson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Thanks for the update. I particularly dislike the "1:1" terminology,
because in maths-speak *any* ranges translation is 1:1, unless it
includes overlapping ranges.
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
