On 5/6/08, Sascha Hauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, May 05, 2008 at 01:22:40PM -0400, Jon Smirl wrote:
> > On 5/5/08, Grant Likely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 11:01 AM, Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Did this get fixed somehow? I used to need t
On Mon, May 05, 2008 at 01:22:40PM -0400, Jon Smirl wrote:
> On 5/5/08, Grant Likely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 11:01 AM, Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Did this get fixed somehow? I used to need this to boot a pcm030.
> >
> >
> > I'm sorry; I'm at a lost as
On Tue, 6 May 2008 07:51:55 +0200 Segher Boessenkool <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > OLPC? check?
>
> No check. The kernel hardly uses the device tree at all, there.
oh, OK.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
pgpNcFqKyidUf.pgp
PowerPC? check.
Sparc? check.
Microblaze? check.
OLPC? check?
No check. The kernel hardly uses the device tree at all, there.
Segher
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
On Mon, 5 May 2008 13:38:30 -0600 "Grant Likely" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> PowerPC? check.
> Sparc? check.
> Microblaze? check.
OLPC? check?
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
pgpEpqUtn0B2F.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 12:06 PM, Segher Boessenkool
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > > Add board support for the Phytec pcm030 mpc5200b based board. It
> > > does not need any platform specific fixups and as such is handled
> > > as a mpc5200 simple platform.
> > >
> >
> > Those still whingeing
Add board support for the Phytec pcm030 mpc5200b based board. It
does not need any platform specific fixups and as such is handled
as a mpc5200 simple platform.
Those still whingeing about how horrible and hard and tedious the new
world of device trees is, take note. We've certainly had some
te
On 5/5/08, Grant Likely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 11:01 AM, Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Did this get fixed somehow? I used to need this to boot a pcm030.
>
>
> I'm sorry; I'm at a lost as to context. Are you asking for this patch
> to be applied? Or are yo
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 11:01 AM, Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Did this get fixed somehow? I used to need this to boot a pcm030.
I'm sorry; I'm at a lost as to context. Are you asking for this patch
to be applied? Or are you asking if this has been addressed in
another way?
Cheers,
g.
Did this get fixed somehow? I used to need this to boot a pcm030.
diff --git a/fs/jffs2/scan.c b/fs/jffs2/scan.c
index 272872d..c982adc 100644
--- a/fs/jffs2/scan.c
+++ b/fs/jffs2/scan.c
@@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
#include
#include
#include
+#include
#include "nodelist.h"
#include "summary.h"
#in
On Sun, May 4, 2008 at 7:16 PM, David Gibson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 03:48:05PM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > Add board support for the Phytec pcm030 mpc5200b based board. It
> > does not need any platform specific fixups and as such is handled
> > as a mpc5200 simp
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 03:48:05PM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> Add board support for the Phytec pcm030 mpc5200b based board. It
> does not need any platform specific fixups and as such is handled
> as a mpc5200 simple platform.
Those still whingeing about how horrible and hard and tedious the new
Add board support for the Phytec pcm030 mpc5200b based board. It
does not need any platform specific fixups and as such is handled
as a mpc5200 simple platform.
Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
arch/powerpc/boot/dts/pcm030.dts | 363
arch/powerpc/configs/
13 matches
Mail list logo
