Hi Stephen,
See my comments inlined below.
On Tuesday, October 9, 2012 10:41:41 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> This makes the FAT filesystem API more consistent with other
> block-based
> filesystems. If in the future standard multi-filesystem commands such
> as
> "ls" or "load" are implemented, hav
Hi Albert,
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Albert ARIBAUD
wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
>
> On Tue, 09 Oct 2012 16:14:23 -0600, Stephen Warren
> wrote:
>
>> This actually turns out to be less work for custodians if there aren't
>> any dependencies between patch series, since whenever you send a pull
>>
On 10/09/2012 04:19 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> Hi Tom,
>
> On Tue, 9 Oct 2012 14:32:08 -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 03:03:28PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
>>> On 10/09/2012 08:23 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
On Sun, Oct 07, 2012 at 08:49:00PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>
On 10/09/2012 04:59 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 04:14:23PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 10/09/2012 03:32 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 03:03:28PM -0600, Stephen Warren
>>> wrote:
On 10/09/2012 08:23 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 07, 2012 at 08:
Hi Graeme,
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 8:15 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
>
diff --git a/arch/x86/cpu/resetvec.S b/arch/x86/cpu/resetvec.S
index 44aee5f..5b359ff 100644
--- a/arch/x86/cpu/resetvec.S
+++ b/arch/x86/cpu/re
Hi Tom,
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 9:59 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 04:14:23PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 10/09/2012 03:32 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>> > On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 03:03:28PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> >> On 10/09/2012 08:23 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
>> >>> On Sun, O
Hi Simon,
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 10:11 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
>
> Looks good - yes I will prepare a new series to send likely on Thursday.
>
> Not that it matters for now, but who will define INCLUDE_X86_RESET_VECTOR?
It's calculated in the Makefile as an inversion of CONFIG_X86_NO_RESET_VECT
On 10/09/2012 05:00 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 10/09/2012 05:14:23 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 10/09/2012 03:32 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>> > On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 03:03:28PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> >> On 10/09/2012 08:23 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
>> >>> On Sun, Oct 07, 2012 at 08:49:00PM +0200,
Dear Tom Rini,
> On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 12:37:26PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > Dear Wolfgang Denk,
> >
> > > Dear Marek Vasut,
> > >
> > > In message <201210011107.45164.ma...@denx.de> you wrote:
> > > > Agreed, not the whole file. But, can you check the rules I tried to
> > > > outline?
> >
On 10/09/2012 05:06 PM, Benoît Thébaudeau wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
>
> See my comments inlined below.
>
> On Tuesday, October 9, 2012 10:41:41 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> This makes the FAT filesystem API more consistent with other
>> block-based
>> filesystems. If in the future standard multi-files
On 10.10.2012 00:27, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
Hi Łukasz,
On Tue, 9 Oct 2012 14:45:33 -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 05:34:13PM +0200, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
Hi Tom,
The following changes since commit 661c21dd46e857b74682b0610d83cfea7f3ac3c2:
usb.h: Add udc_disconnect protot
Define CONFIG_CONS_INDEX to use ffuart as default console and fix
compilation error related to undefined CONFIG_CONS_INDEX.
Signed-off-by: Lukasz Dalek
---
include/configs/h2200.h |1 +
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/configs/h2200.h b/include/configs/h
On 10/09/2012 06:25:47 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 10/09/2012 05:00 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 10/09/2012 05:14:23 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> I don't quite follow that; linux-next is also purely merge-based.
Are
>> you referring to the fact that it's re-created every day, and the
>> source
Dear Lukasz Dalek,
> Define CONFIG_CONS_INDEX to use ffuart as default console and fix
> compilation error related to undefined CONFIG_CONS_INDEX.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Dalek
Acked-by: Marek Vasut
> ---
> include/configs/h2200.h |1 +
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-
Hi, Andreas
On 10/10/2012 5:51 AM, Andreas Bießmann wrote:
Hi Josh,
On 09.10.12 12:11, Josh Wu wrote:
Hi, Andreas
Any feedback of these patches?
short answer: no ;)
I think they could go into next (no obvious objections), but I would
like to do some runtime tests on avr32 before. Beside tha
On 10/8/2012 6:38 AM, Stefano Babic wrote:
On 04/10/2012 03:47, Troy Kisky wrote:
The '#' used as comments in the files cause the preprocessor
trouble, so change to /* */.
Signed-off-by: Troy Kisky
---
Hi Troy,
Makefile |3 +-
board/esg/ima3-mx53/i
FYI: Piotr and Lukasz are working together for samsung board.
Minkyu, can you pick up this patch?
Thank you,
Kyungmin Park
> -Original Message-
> From: Albert ARIBAUD [mailto:albert.u.b...@aribaud.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 2:07 AM
> To: Piotr Wilczek
> Cc: u-boot@lists.den
Hi Stephen,
On Tue, 09 Oct 2012 17:04:06 -0600, Stephen Warren
wrote:
> On 10/09/2012 04:19 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> > Apart from this, I'm not sure why forbidding fast-forward is a good
> > thing, but if there are benefits, why not.
>
> It provides documentation in the git history of when
Dear Jeong-Hyeon Kim,
On 29 August 2012 12:28, wrote:
> From: Jeong-Hyeon Kim
>
> - Fixed MPLL register address
> It's different between Exynos4210 and Exynos4412.
>
> - Added pinmux functions for Exynos4
>
> - Added extended gpios for Exynos4412
> Exynos4412 has more gpios than Exynos4210.
Hi Tom,
> On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 01:34:35PM +0200, Stefano Babic wrote:
> > On 09/10/2012 12:25, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> [snip]
> > >> We use often the "weak" mechanism to avoid that a board
> > >> maintainer is constrained to implement an empty function only to
> > >> make happy the linker. It
101 - 120 of 120 matches
Mail list logo