On 14:04 Mon 22 Jun , Scott Wood wrote:
> Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> >no as you add the nand in this patch
> >the nand need to be add in a seperate patch,
> >this one need to only add the s3c2440 support
> >and the nand will be handle by Scott the nand Maintainer
>
> If a NAND p
kevin.morf...@fearnside-systems.co.uk wrote:
> These type names (and the 'const') are in the existing s3c24x0 code so I
> just made my new code follow the same style and Lindent and checkpatch
> didn't complain. The u-boot coding style guidelines say we should use the
> Linux coding style and th
On 22/06/2009 20:26, Scott Wood wrote:
> Keven Morfitt wrote:
>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/s3c2410_nand.c
>> b/drivers/mtd/nand/s3c2410_nand.c
>> index 60bfd10..b93787c 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/s3c2410_nand.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/s3c2410_nand.c
>> @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@
>> static voi
On 22/06/2009 20:04, Scott Wood wrote:
> Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
>> no as you add the nand in this patch
>> the nand need to be add in a seperate patch,
>> this one need to only add the s3c2440 support
>> and the nand will be handle by Scott the nand Maintainer
>
> If a NAND patc
Keven Morfitt wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/s3c2410_nand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/s3c2410_nand.c
> index 60bfd10..b93787c 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/s3c2410_nand.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/s3c2410_nand.c
> @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@
> static void s3c2410_hwcontrol(struct mtd_info *mtd, int cmd, u
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> no as you add the nand in this patch
> the nand need to be add in a seperate patch,
> this one need to only add the s3c2440 support
> and the nand will be handle by Scott the nand Maintainer
If a NAND patch is sandwiched in the middle of other patches that
On 21/06/2009 10:46, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> On 00:56 Sun 21 Jun , kevin.morf...@fearnside-systems.co.uk wrote:
>> Hi Jean-Christophe, comments below:
>>
>> Also, see note at the end regarding re-structuring of the existing
>> s3c24x0 and
>> Embest SBC2440-II Board patches.
>
On 00:56 Sun 21 Jun , kevin.morf...@fearnside-systems.co.uk wrote:
> Hi Jean-Christophe, comments below:
>
> Also, see note at the end regarding re-structuring of the existing
> s3c24x0 and
> Embest SBC2440-II Board patches.
>
> On 20/06/2009 18:36, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> >
Hi Jean-Christophe, comments below:
Also, see note at the end regarding re-structuring of the existing
s3c24x0 and
Embest SBC2440-II Board patches.
On 20/06/2009 18:36, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> On 17:42 Fri 19 Jun , kevin.morf...@fearnside-systems.co.uk wrote:
>
>> This is
On 17:42 Fri 19 Jun , kevin.morf...@fearnside-systems.co.uk wrote:
> This is the first of two patches that will add support for the Embest
> SBC2440-II Board. This one adds generic support for the S3C2440 CPU. Tested
> by
> running MAKEALL for ARM9 boards - no new warnings or errors were fou
Dear "kevin.morf...@fearnside-systems.co.uk",
In message <4a3bc001.3010...@fearnside-systems.co.uk> you wrote:
> This is the first of two patches that will add support for the Embest
> SBC2440-II Board. This one adds generic support for the S3C2440 CPU. Tested by
> running MAKEALL for ARM9 boards
11 matches
Mail list logo
