On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 03:30:39PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-08-27 at 14:38 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
> > We have not introduced new PPS interface. We use existing PPS subsystem.
>
> Doesn't the pps subsystem have its own way to control the pps signal
> interrupt? I'm not totall
>
> Then the device tree identifier, and the cpu setup functions, etc,
> should indicate
> 464, not APM821xx.
This is new SoC based on 464 cpu core. All the previous SoC device tree
CPU portion uses SoC name.
>
> Also, why add yet another defconfig? Isn't the eval board similar to
> many others an
> -Original Message-
> From: Anton Vorontsov [mailto:cbouatmai...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 19:44 PM
> To: Zang Roy-R61911
> Cc: linux-...@lists.infradead.org; Lan Chunhe-B25806; linuxppc-...@ozlabs.org;
> a...@linux-foundation.org; Gala Kumar-B11780; Wood Scott-B07421
> -Original Message-
> From: Anton Vorontsov [mailto:cbouatmai...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 19:36 PM
> To: Zang Roy-R61911
> Cc: linux-...@lists.infradead.org; Lan Chunhe-B25806; linuxppc-...@ozlabs.org;
> a...@linux-foundation.org; Gala Kumar-B11780
> Subject: Re: [PA
> -Original Message-
> From: Anton Vorontsov [mailto:cbouatmai...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 19:44 PM
> To: Zang Roy-R61911
> Cc: linux-...@lists.infradead.org; Lan Chunhe-B25806; linuxppc-...@ozlabs.org;
> a...@linux-foundation.org; Gala Kumar-B11780; Wood Scott-B07421
> -Original Message-
> From: Anton Vorontsov [mailto:cbouatmai...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 19:28 PM
> To: Zang Roy-R61911
> Cc: linux-...@lists.infradead.org; Lan Chunhe-B25806; linuxppc-...@ozlabs.org;
> a...@linux-foundation.org; Gala Kumar-B11780
> Subject: Re: [PA
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 01:38:46PM -0700, Tirumala Marri wrote:
> > >APM821xx is Applied Micro Circuits Corporations naming convention for
> > >new line of SoCs.
> >
> > So is it a 440x6 core then? Or what core is inside the SoC?
> [Marri] It is 464 core.
Then the device tree identifier, and the
The function has an unsigned return type, but returns a negative constant
to indicate an error condition. The result of calling the function is
always stored in a variable of type (signed) int, and thus unsigned can be
dropped from the return type.
A sematic match that finds this problem is as fo
