On Monday 05 October 2009, Paulraj, Sandeep wrote:
>
> > I guess that happened after I prepared the patch but before I sent
> > it in. I'll look; there were some differences still. Notably to
> > store the environment in the otherwise-unused block zero,
>
> That is because most users who have us
>
> > > I have already ack-ed Sandeep's patch that contains this
> > > fix for the warning. Please check with him.
> >
> > That is correct, I did not add it to my tree because you ACK'ed
> > this patch only after I sent a pull request. So obviously I cannot
> > add a patch that has been ACK'ed
On Monday 05 October 2009, Paulraj, Sandeep wrote:
> > I have already ack-ed Sandeep's patch that contains this
> > fix for the warning. Please check with him.
>
> That is correct, I did not add it to my tree because you ACK'ed
> this patch only after I sent a pull request. So obviously I cannot
On Monday 05 October 2009, Tom wrote:
> In general it is better to break patches that do multiple things into
> multiple patches. When you resubmit, please break this patch into its
> logical parts :
> 1. NAND
> 2. Environment
Hmm, my *original* patch necessarily disabled both
because there was
>
> David Brownell wrote:
> > This is the second half of my DM355 EVM support patches, adding
> > the NAND support now that the 4-bit ECC is merged:
> >
> > - Kick in NAND support, enabling
> > * the DaVinci NAND driver
> > * its 4-bit ECC support
> > * MTD_DEVICE (newish, should
David Brownell wrote:
> This is the second half of my DM355 EVM support patches, adding
> the NAND support now that the 4-bit ECC is merged:
>
> - Kick in NAND support, enabling
> * the DaVinci NAND driver
> * its 4-bit ECC support
> * MTD_DEVICE (newish, should be automatic!)
>
This is the second half of my DM355 EVM support patches, adding
the NAND support now that the 4-bit ECC is merged:
- Kick in NAND support, enabling
* the DaVinci NAND driver
* its 4-bit ECC support
* MTD_DEVICE (newish, should be automatic!)
* 64-bit printf (newish, should be
7 matches
Mail list logo