No hurry, I'm busy too :)
Updating whole at91 would require someone else to test it on particular
platform.
Roughly it looks like only patches/* should be the subject to change, so
shouldn't be much work.
Anyway, I'll back to this in spare time.
BTW, u-boot update would be an option too at least f
Sorry for the late response.
On Jan 23, 2012 4:48 PM, "Przemysław Rudy" wrote:
>
> On 23.01.2012 15:30, Jonas Gorski wrote:
> > [...]
> > This all belongs into a seperate patch and has nothing to do with
> > updating at91 to 3.2.1 (which you also do in this patch).
> ok, as 'original' MMnet1000
On 23.01.2012 15:30, Jonas Gorski wrote:
> [...]
> This all belongs into a seperate patch and has nothing to do with
> updating at91 to 3.2.1 (which you also do in this patch).
ok, as 'original' MMnet1000 patch is not included in the tree my idea
was to do it from scratch to replace the previous/ba
I took a brief look and it looks like upstream now has its own
capabilities to specify an active high vbus [1], so it seems we can
drop the patch and set vbus_pin_inverted = 1 in the board-tqma9263.c
files at91_usbh_data struct.
~ Jow
[1] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2
2012/1/23 Przemysław Rudy :
> Any suggestions how can we proceed with this?
> The 600- patch does not apply for newest kernel:
> - removing it breaks thing you noticed,
> - keeping it prevents from using kernel 3xx
The generic process I use is:
1. Find out what upstream commit made the patch not
2012/1/23 Przemysław Rudy :
> On 23.01.2012 11:20, Jonas Gorski wrote:
>> ...
>> Please split this patch into two patches (update to 3.2 and MMnet1000
>> support). Also when doing a kernel update please refresh the patches
> The MMnet1000 support has been already sent (in 2011).
> This is actually
On 23.01.2012 11:20, Jonas Gorski wrote:
> ...
> Please split this patch into two patches (update to 3.2 and MMnet1000
> support). Also when doing a kernel update please refresh the patches
The MMnet1000 support has been already sent (in 2011).
This is actually an update to 3.2.1 only.
Unless you
Any suggestions how can we proceed with this?
The 600- patch does not apply for newest kernel:
- removing it breaks thing you noticed,
- keeping it prevents from using kernel 3xx
Thanks
Przemek
On 23.01.2012 11:25, Jo-Philipp Wich wrote:
> Hi.
>
>> Note it removes 600-usb_vbus_active_high.patch,
Right, mail-wrap, will fix it.
On 23.01.2012 11:20, Jonas Gorski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 22 January 2012 22:55, Przemek Rudy wrote:
>> Update for MMnet1000 board support for kernel 3.2.1 (svn r29742).
>
> This patch does not apply for me:
>
> jonas@shaker64:~/openwrt/root-git$ patch -p1 -i index.h
Hi.
> Note it removes 600-usb_vbus_active_high.patch, that does not apply any
> more.
Unless upstream gained some logic to handle the inverted active state,
this is still needed, otherwise USB on the TQMA9263 will break if the
patch is not forward ported, therefore a NACK from me here.
~ Jow
___
Hi,
On 22 January 2012 22:55, Przemek Rudy wrote:
> Update for MMnet1000 board support for kernel 3.2.1 (svn r29742).
This patch does not apply for me:
jonas@shaker64:~/openwrt/root-git$ patch -p1 -i index.html.1
patching file linux/at91/MMnet1000/config-default
patching file linux/at91/MMnet10
11 matches
Mail list logo
