On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 04:18:41PM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> If there are other requirements to have i2c initialise early we can well
> move it up the chain. I think it would be preferable to modifying each i2c
> host adapter driver to use subsys_init().
IIRC there are other orderin
On Mon, 20 Apr 2009, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 03:50:44PM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
>
> > break if we move it down right after i2c? Another hackish interim solution
> > would be to replace module_init with subsys_init in i2c-sh_mobile.c like
> > some other i2c adapte
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 03:50:44PM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> break if we move it down right after i2c? Another hackish interim solution
> would be to replace module_init with subsys_init in i2c-sh_mobile.c like
> some other i2c adapters do (including MXC, PXA). That's certainly easie
On Mon, 20 Apr 2009, Magnus Damm wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski
> wrote:
> > On Mon, 20 Apr 2009, Magnus Damm wrote:
> >> Can you please test on your Migo-R board? I'd be happy to assist you
> >> in setting up your environment.
> >
> > I did test it and it worked
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski
wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Apr 2009, Magnus Damm wrote:
>> Can you please test on your Migo-R board? I'd be happy to assist you
>> in setting up your environment.
>
> I did test it and it worked - exactly as you say - with the entire patch
> stack +
On Mon, 20 Apr 2009, Magnus Damm wrote:
> So linux-next fa169db2b277ebafa466d625ed2d16b2d2a4bc82 with
> 20090415/series applies without any rejects and compiles just fine for
> Migo-R. However, during runtime I experience the same problem as with
> 2.6.30-rc plus 0033->0035 + 0036 or v2:
>
> / #
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski
wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Apr 2009, Magnus Damm wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 7:43 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Magnus Damm wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 4:51 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
On Mon, 20 Apr 2009, Magnus Damm wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 7:43 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski
> wrote:
> > On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Magnus Damm wrote:
> >> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 4:51 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Magnus Damm wrote:
> >> >> On Wed, Apr 15, 200
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 7:43 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski
wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Magnus Damm wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 4:51 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Magnus Damm wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 9:17 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
Hi Morimoto-san,
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 9:12 AM, Kuninori Morimoto
wrote:
>
> Hi Magnus
>
>> >> > http://www.open-technology.de/download/20090415/ based on linux-next
>> >> > history branch, commit ID in -base file. Don't be surprised, that
>> >> > patch-set also contains a few not directly
Hi Magnus
> >> > http://www.open-technology.de/download/20090415/ based on linux-next
> >> > history branch, commit ID in -base file. Don't be surprised, that
> >> > patch-set also contains a few not directly related patches.
> >>
> >> Testing on Migo-R board with 2.6.30-rc2-git-something and
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Magnus Damm wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 4:51 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski
> wrote:
> > On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Magnus Damm wrote:
> >> On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 9:17 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski
> >> wrote:
> >> > This patch series is a preparation for the v4l2-subdev conversion.
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 4:51 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski
wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Magnus Damm wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 9:17 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski
>> wrote:
>> > This patch series is a preparation for the v4l2-subdev conversion. Please,
>> > review and test. My current patch-stack
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Magnus Damm wrote:
> Hi Guennadi,
>
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 9:17 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski
> wrote:
> > This patch series is a preparation for the v4l2-subdev conversion. Please,
> > review and test. My current patch-stack in the form of a
> > (manually-created) quilt-seri
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 4:48 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski
wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Dongsoo, Nathaniel Kim wrote:
>
>> I've got one more thing to ask.
>> Is SoC camera framework supporting for selecting video standards
>> between camera interface and external camera module? I mean ITU-R BT
>> 601
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Dongsoo, Nathaniel Kim wrote:
> I've got one more thing to ask.
> Is SoC camera framework supporting for selecting video standards
> between camera interface and external camera module? I mean ITU-R BT
> 601 and 656 things.
> Or any different way that I'm not aware is supporte
Hi Guennadi,
On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 9:17 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski
wrote:
> This patch series is a preparation for the v4l2-subdev conversion. Please,
> review and test. My current patch-stack in the form of a
> (manually-created) quilt-series is at
> http://www.open-technology.de/download/20090
Hello,
I've got one more thing to ask.
Is SoC camera framework supporting for selecting video standards
between camera interface and external camera module? I mean ITU-R BT
601 and 656 things.
Or any different way that I'm not aware is supported?
On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 9:17 PM, Guennadi Liakhove
Guennadi Liakhovetski writes:
>> - I unload and reload mt9m111 and pxa_camera
>> => not any better
>
> Actually, I think, in this case it should be found again, as long as you
> reload pxa-camera while i2c-pxa is already loaded.
Damn, you're right. I cross-checked, and reloading pxa_camera
On Thu, 16 Apr 2009, Robert Jarzmik wrote:
> Robert Jarzmik writes:
>
> > I need to make some additionnal tests with I2C loading/unloading, but
> > otherwise
> > it works perfectly for (soc_camera / pxa_camera /mt9m111 combination).
>
> Guennadi,
>
> I made some testing, and there is somethin
Robert Jarzmik writes:
> I need to make some additionnal tests with I2C loading/unloading, but
> otherwise
> it works perfectly for (soc_camera / pxa_camera /mt9m111 combination).
Guennadi,
I made some testing, and there is something I don't understand in the new device
model.
This is the test
Guennadi Liakhovetski writes:
> This patch series is a preparation for the v4l2-subdev conversion. Please,
> review and test. My current patch-stack in the form of a
> (manually-created) quilt-series is at
> http://www.open-technology.de/download/20090415/ based on linux-next
> history branch
This patch series is a preparation for the v4l2-subdev conversion. Please,
review and test. My current patch-stack in the form of a
(manually-created) quilt-series is at
http://www.open-technology.de/download/20090415/ based on linux-next
history branch, commit ID in -base file. Don't be su
23 matches
Mail list logo