Em 05-07-2010 13:48, Jarkko Nikula escreveu:
> On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 13:09:22 -0300
> Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
>
>> Hi Eduardo,
>>
>> This patch is still on my queue. It is not clear to me what "proably fine"
>> means...
>> Please ack or nack on it for me to move ahead ;)
>>
> Ah, sorry, I sho
On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 13:09:22 -0300
Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Hi Eduardo,
>
> This patch is still on my queue. It is not clear to me what "proably fine"
> means...
> Please ack or nack on it for me to move ahead ;)
>
Ah, sorry, I should have nacked this myself after I sent the regulator
fr
Em 18-05-2010 10:24, Jarkko Nikula escreveu:
> On Tue, 18 May 2010 15:55:27 +0300
> Eduardo Valentin wrote:
>
>> I'm probably fine with this patch, and the driver must check for the pointer
>> before using it, indeed.
>>
>> But, I'm a bit skeptic about marking its platform data as __initdata. Wou
On Tue, 18 May 2010 15:55:27 +0300
Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> I'm probably fine with this patch, and the driver must check for the pointer
> before using it, indeed.
>
> But, I'm a bit skeptic about marking its platform data as __initdata. Would
> it make sense?
> What happens if driver is built
Hello,
On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 07:04:26PM +0200, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> This driver can cause an oops if si4713_platform_data holding pointer to
> set_power function is marked as __initdata and when trying to power up the
> chip after booting e.g. with 'v4l2-ctl -d /dev/radio0 --set-ctrl=mute=0'.
This driver can cause an oops if si4713_platform_data holding pointer to
set_power function is marked as __initdata and when trying to power up the
chip after booting e.g. with 'v4l2-ctl -d /dev/radio0 --set-ctrl=mute=0'.
This happens because the sdev->platform_data doesn't point to valid data
any
