On Saturday 28 February 2015 10:58 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj
> wrote:
>> On Thursday 19 February 2015 07:32 PM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj wrote:
>>> On Thursday 19 February 2015 06:13 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
On Thu, Feb
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj
wrote:
>
> On Thursday 19 February 2015 07:32 PM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj wrote:
>> On Thursday 19 February 2015 06:13 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj
>> diff --git a/l
On Thursday 19 February 2015 07:32 PM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj wrote:
> On Thursday 19 February 2015 06:13 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj
>> wrote:
>>> On Thursday 19 February 2015 04:00 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
On Thu, Feb
On Thursday 19 February 2015 06:13 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj
> wrote:
>> On Thursday 19 February 2015 04:00 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:49 AM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj
>>> wrote:
> Harrish, in
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj
wrote:
>
> On Thursday 19 February 2015 04:00 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:49 AM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj
>> wrote:
Harrish, in your patch if you just change the "return
KMOD_MODULE_BUILTIN;"
On Thursday 19 February 2015 04:00 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:49 AM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj
> wrote:
>>> Harrish, in your patch if you just change the "return
>>> KMOD_MODULE_BUILTIN;" to "return KMOD_MODULE_COMING;" does it work?
>> Yes. Returning KMOD_MODULE_CO
On Thursday 19 February 2015 04:00 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:49 AM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj
> wrote:
>>> Harrish, in your patch if you just change the "return
>>> KMOD_MODULE_BUILTIN;" to "return KMOD_MODULE_COMING;" does it work?
>> Yes. Returning KMOD_MODULE_CO
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:49 AM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj
wrote:
>> Harrish, in your patch if you just change the "return
>> KMOD_MODULE_BUILTIN;" to "return KMOD_MODULE_COMING;" does it work?
>
> Yes. Returning KMOD_MODULE_COMING instead of KMOD_MODULE_BUILTIN works. The
> built-in modules
On Thursday 19 February 2015 06:49 AM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 8:40 PM, Rusty Russell wrote:
>> Lucas De Marchi writes:
>>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 2:07 AM, Rusty Russell
>>> wrote:
>>> Yeah, I just thought (an wanted that) the attributes were being
>>> created first a
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 12:25 AM, greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 11:19:14PM -0200, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 8:40 PM, Rusty Russell wrote:
>> > Lucas De Marchi writes:
>> >> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 2:07 AM, Rusty Russell
>> >> wrote:
>> >> Yeah, I just thought
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 12:25 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Lucas De Marchi writes:
>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 8:40 PM, Rusty Russell wrote:
>>> Lucas De Marchi writes:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 2:07 AM, Rusty Russell
wrote:
Yeah, I just thought (an wanted that) the attributes were
Lucas De Marchi writes:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 8:40 PM, Rusty Russell wrote:
>> Lucas De Marchi writes:
>>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 2:07 AM, Rusty Russell
>>> wrote:
>>> Yeah, I just thought (an wanted that) the attributes were being
>>> created first and then hooked up in the sysfs tree un
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 11:19:14PM -0200, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 8:40 PM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > Lucas De Marchi writes:
> >> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 2:07 AM, Rusty Russell
> >> wrote:
> >> Yeah, I just thought (an wanted that) the attributes were being
> >> created
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 8:40 PM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Lucas De Marchi writes:
>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 2:07 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
>> Yeah, I just thought (an wanted that) the attributes were being
>> created first and then hooked up in the sysfs tree under
>> /sys/module/. I.e. if the dir
Lucas De Marchi writes:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 2:07 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Yeah, I just thought (an wanted that) the attributes were being
> created first and then hooked up in the sysfs tree under
> /sys/module/. I.e. if the directory exists and there's no
> initstate this is because it's
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 2:07 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Lucas De Marchi writes:
>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Harish Jenny K N
>> wrote:
>>> usecase: two sd cards are being mounted in parallel at same time on
>>> dual core. example modules which are getting loaded is nls_cp437.
>>> While
On Wednesday 18 February 2015 09:37 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Lucas De Marchi writes:
>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Harish Jenny K N
>> wrote:
>>> usecase: two sd cards are being mounted in parallel at same time on
>>> dual core. example modules which are getting loaded is nls_cp437.
>>>
Lucas De Marchi writes:
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Harish Jenny K N
> wrote:
>> usecase: two sd cards are being mounted in parallel at same time on
>> dual core. example modules which are getting loaded is nls_cp437.
>> While one module is being loaded , it starts creating sysfs files.
>
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Harish Jenny K N
wrote:
> usecase: two sd cards are being mounted in parallel at same time on
> dual core. example modules which are getting loaded is nls_cp437.
> While one module is being loaded , it starts creating sysfs files.
> meanwhile on other core, modpro
19 matches
Mail list logo
