From: Grant Likely
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 21:59:39 -0600
> of: make of_(un)register_platform_driver common code.
>
> Some drivers using of_register_platform_driver() wrapper break on sparc
> because the wrapper isn't in the header file. This patch moves it from
> Microblaze and
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Andrew Morton
wrote:
> On Tue, 03 Mar 2009 16:37:13 -0800 (PST)
> David Miller wrote:
>
>> From: Sean MacLennan
>> Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 19:29:32 -0500
>>
>> > It has been. u carry the two... longer than I want to admit
>> > since I worked on a sparc. Wou
On Tue, 03 Mar 2009 16:37:13 -0800 (PST)
David Miller wrote:
> From: Sean MacLennan
> Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 19:29:32 -0500
>
> > It has been. u carry the two... longer than I want to admit
> > since I worked on a sparc. Would GPIO based LEDS make sense on a sparc
> > platform? Is sparc
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 11:29, Sean MacLennan wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Mar 2009 16:09:06 -0800
> "Andrew Morton" wrote:
>
>> afacit that interface is powerpc-only.
>
> Yes it is. You might want a CONFIG_PPC with that.
>
> It has been. u carry the two... longer than I want to admit
> since I work
From: Sean MacLennan
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 19:29:32 -0500
> It has been. u carry the two... longer than I want to admit
> since I worked on a sparc. Would GPIO based LEDS make sense on a sparc
> platform? Is sparc used much in the embedded world?
>
> If yes, the of_register_platform_driv
On Tue, 3 Mar 2009 16:09:06 -0800
"Andrew Morton" wrote:
> afacit that interface is powerpc-only.
Yes it is. You might want a CONFIG_PPC with that.
It has been. u carry the two... longer than I want to admit
since I worked on a sparc. Would GPIO based LEDS make sense on a sparc
platform
On Tue, 3 Mar 2009 17:15:58 -0700
Grant Likely wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 5:09 PM, Andrew Morton
> wrote:
> >
> > linux-next's dc0f6e94d7f487c624254597a0b86ef41c525673 (which I don't
> > seem to be able to find on any mailing lists to which I subscribe)
> > breaks the sparc64 allmodconfig
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 5:09 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> linux-next's dc0f6e94d7f487c624254597a0b86ef41c525673 (which I don't
> seem to be able to find on any mailing lists to which I subscribe)
> breaks the sparc64 allmodconfig build:
Hmm, I don't see that one either. Which tree did it go in vi
linux-next's dc0f6e94d7f487c624254597a0b86ef41c525673 (which I don't
seem to be able to find on any mailing lists to which I subscribe)
breaks the sparc64 allmodconfig build:
drivers/leds/leds-gpio.c: In function `gpio_led_init':
drivers/leds/leds-gpio.c:286: error: implicit declaration of functi
