On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 05:55:13PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 April 2008 17:36, Scott Wood wrote:
> > The only reason I can see for that would be if the gpiolib version
> > doesn't work on arch/ppc -- but that's not going to be a problem for very
> > much longer.
>
> Didn't you
On Tuesday 22 April 2008 17:36, Scott Wood wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 05:21:49PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > As the openfirmware + gpio + mdio driver might benefit non-powerpc
> > platforms, I plan to create a new driver (probably
> > drivers/net/phy/mdio-ofgpio.c) that mostly ports
>
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 05:21:49PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> As the openfirmware + gpio + mdio driver might benefit non-powerpc platforms,
> I plan to create a new driver (probably drivers/net/phy/mdio-ofgpio.c) that
> mostly ports drivers/net/fs_enet/mii-bitbang.c to the gpiolib (this rep
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 05:21:49PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 April 2008 17:08, Scott Wood wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 10:55:06AM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > On Monday 21 April 2008 19:56, Scott Wood wrote:
> > > > The memory-constrained platform I had in mind wa
On Tuesday 22 April 2008 17:08, Scott Wood wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 10:55:06AM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Monday 21 April 2008 19:56, Scott Wood wrote:
> > > The memory-constrained platform I had in mind was 8xx, which doesn't use
> > > bitbanged MDIO. It might nice to keep the
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 10:55:06AM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> On Monday 21 April 2008 19:56, Scott Wood wrote:
> > The memory-constrained platform I had in mind was 8xx, which doesn't use
> > bitbanged MDIO. It might nice to keep the gpiolib bit separate to avoid
> > situations such as ep824
On Monday 21 April 2008 19:56, Scott Wood wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 01:34:29PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > Scott Wood was concerned in
> > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/linuxppc/patch?id=17490 that the gpio lib
> > might be an unnecessary burden for memory-constraint platforms. Should
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 01:34:29PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Scott Wood was concerned in
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/linuxppc/patch?id=17490 that the gpio lib might
> be an unnecessary burden for memory-constraint platforms. Should we keep two
> mdio bitbang drivers, one with direct acc
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 8:40 AM, Laurent Pinchart
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This patch converts the MII bitband driver to use GPIO lib for GPIO access.
> The driver can now handle MDC and MDIO on different GPIO banks.
>
> The patch depends on Anton Vorontsov GPIO lib support scheduled for 2.6.
On Wednesday 16 April 2008 18:09, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 April 2008 18:05, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 04:40:42PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > This patch converts the MII bitband driver to use GPIO lib for GPIO
> > > access. The driver can now handl
On Wednesday 16 April 2008 18:05, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 04:40:42PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > This patch converts the MII bitband driver to use GPIO lib for GPIO
> > access. The driver can now handle MDC and MDIO on different GPIO banks.
> >
> > The patch depends
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 04:40:42PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> This patch converts the MII bitband driver to use GPIO lib for GPIO access.
> The driver can now handle MDC and MDIO on different GPIO banks.
>
> The patch depends on Anton Vorontsov GPIO lib support scheduled for 2.6.26.
> It is
This patch converts the MII bitband driver to use GPIO lib for GPIO access.
The driver can now handle MDC and MDIO on different GPIO banks.
The patch depends on Anton Vorontsov GPIO lib support scheduled for 2.6.26.
It is by no means complete, I just would like to get some feedback on the
approach
13 matches
Mail list logo
