Dan,
On 30 April 2016 at 12:16, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 04:41:02PM -0500, Aaron Sierra wrote:
>> There appear to be no in-kernel callers of vme_lm_attach (or
>> vme_lme_request for that matter), so this change only affects the VME
>> subsystem and bridge drivers.
>
> Are we
Dan, Aaron,
On 3 May 2016 at 15:18, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 02:52:54PM +0200, Alessio Igor Bogani wrote:
[...]
>> It would be great since we have a lot of VME drivers (for devices not
>> for bridges) which we would like see mainlined.
>> Unfortuna
Hi Dmitry,
On 6 July 2015 at 19:24, Dmitry Kalinkin wrote:
[...]
>
> I'm not a VME expert, but it seems that VME windows are a quiet limited
> resource
> no matter how you allocate your resources. Theoretically we could put up to 32
> different boards in a single crate, so there won't be enough
nce it
> doesn’t
> have the limitations that the windows have.
> On 07 Jul 2015, at 10:08, Alessio Igor Bogani
> wrote:
[...]
>> In fact this is a big obstacle for adoption of this VME stack (at least for
>> us). We use VME a lot and we care about latency as well so we use o
These drivers have a PCI device ID table but the PCI module
alias information is not created so module autoloading won't work.
Signed-off-by: Alessio Igor Bogani
---
drivers/vme/bridges/vme_ca91cx42.c | 2 ++
drivers/vme/bridges/vme_tsi148.c | 2 ++
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+)
Hi,
On 19 October 2015 at 00:04, Martyn Welch wrote:
> On 18/10/15 18:53, Dmitry Kalinkin wrote:
[...]
>> Other drives meaning vme_pio, I don't see any others. All this time
>> we are discussing how many GE PIO boards one can plug into a crate
>> with or without vme_user. Most of people have zero
Hi,
On 19 October 2015 at 11:19, Dmitry Kalinkin wrote:
[...]
> There is no optimal solution. In vanilla kernel you have just two drivers. You
> can either have 8 GE PIO2 boards or 4 GE PIO2 boards and any amount of boards
> potentially accessible through vme_user. None of this provides for the c
