Re: [PATCH 1/2] net: ll_temac: fix interrupt bug when interrupt 0 is used

2010-06-05 Thread Grant Likely
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 10:12 PM, John Williams wrote: > On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 3:29 AM, John Linn wrote: >> The code is not checking the interrupt for DMA correctly so that an >> interrupt number of 0 will cause a false error. >> >> Signed-off-by: Brian Hill >> Signed-off-by: John Linn >> ---

Re: [PATCH] [powerpc] do not expect executable permissions for in-tree shell scripts

2010-06-05 Thread Sean MacLennan
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 19:44:37 +0200 Olaf Hering wrote: > Maybe. > As it stands right now, mkuboot.sh does not run without bash. > > > And: > Reality check please. > A _development system_ without bash, installed per default on every > sane Linux distro, does most likely not exist. Hmmm, can't ar

Re: [PATCH] [powerpc] do not expect executable permissions for in-tree shell scripts

2010-06-05 Thread Olaf Hering
On Sat, Jun 05, Sean MacLennan wrote: > On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 10:10:39 +0200 > Olaf Hering wrote: > > > scripts in the kernel source do not have executable permissions if > > they were created with patch(1) run mkuboot.sh with bash, its tagged > > as bash script. > > Wouldn't it be better to use $

Re: [PATCH] [powerpc] do not expect executable permissions for in-tree shell scripts

2010-06-05 Thread Sean MacLennan
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 10:10:39 +0200 Olaf Hering wrote: > scripts in the kernel source do not have executable permissions if > they were created with patch(1) run mkuboot.sh with bash, its tagged > as bash script. Wouldn't it be better to use ${SHELL}? Not every system has bash. Cheers, Sean __

Re: [PATCH v21 011/100] eclone (11/11): Document sys_eclone

2010-06-05 Thread Albert Cahalan
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 9:38 PM, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote: > | Come on, seriously, you know it's ia64 and hppa that > | have issues. Maybe the nommu ports also have issues. > | > | The only portable way to specify the stack is base and offset, > | with flags or magic values for "share" and "kernel

Re: [PATCH v21 011/100] eclone (11/11): Document sys_eclone

2010-06-05 Thread Albert Cahalan
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 9:38 PM, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote: > | Come on, seriously, you know it's ia64 and hppa that > | have issues. Maybe the nommu ports also have issues. > | > | The only portable way to specify the stack is base and offset, > | with flags or magic values for "share" and "kernel

Re: [PATCH v21 011/100] eclone (11/11): Document sys_eclone

2010-06-05 Thread Albert Cahalan
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 9:38 PM, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote: > | Come on, seriously, you know it's ia64 and hppa that > | have issues. Maybe the nommu ports also have issues. > | > | The only portable way to specify the stack is base and offset, > | with flags or magic values for "share" and "kernel

[PATCH] [powerpc] do not expect executable permissions for in-tree shell scripts

2010-06-05 Thread Olaf Hering
scripts in the kernel source do not have executable permissions if they were created with patch(1) run mkuboot.sh with bash, its tagged as bash script. /opt/cross/kernel/linux-2.6.33-cross-host-kernel-source/arch/powerpc/boot/wrapper: line 273: /opt/cross/kernel/linux-2.6.33-cross-host-kernel-