Hi Bin,
On 26 February 2015 at 00:15, Bin Meng wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
>> Hi Bin,
>>
>> On 25 February 2015 at 01:45, Bin Meng wrote:
>>> Hi Simon,
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 5:10 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
At present we do more in this
Hi Simon,
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Bin,
>
> On 25 February 2015 at 01:45, Bin Meng wrote:
>> Hi Simon,
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 5:10 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
>>> At present we do more in this function than we should. Create a new
>>> x86_post_cpu_init() which
Hi Bin,
On 25 February 2015 at 01:45, Bin Meng wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 5:10 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
>> At present we do more in this function than we should. Create a new
>> x86_post_cpu_init() which can be called from the board file when needed
>> (e.g. in board_early_init
Hi Simon,
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 5:10 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
> At present we do more in this function than we should. Create a new
> x86_post_cpu_init() which can be called from the board file when needed
> (e.g. in board_early_init_f(). This allows us to use driver model for
> our x86_post_cpu_
At present we do more in this function than we should. Create a new
x86_post_cpu_init() which can be called from the board file when needed
(e.g. in board_early_init_f(). This allows us to use driver model for
our x86_post_cpu_init() function.
It is likely that some future refactoring will improve
5 matches
Mail list logo