On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 11:35:00AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 10:18:30AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 09:46:18AM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote:
This sounds like the wrong clock polarity. Could you try inverting
On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 11:50:29PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
Answers to these two questions may help stop me wasting a lot of time
chasing what is a really weird bug.
So, I have X up and running on the Cubox-i carrier-1, using the imx-drm
stuff (I've slightly hacked my
On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 11:47:17PM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
li...@arm.linux.org.uk wrote:
Shouldn't the above be in patch 1 (or 1.5) rather than patch 2? Patch 2
advertises itself as adding support for the wandboard, but in
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 11:00:26AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 11:47:17PM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
li...@arm.linux.org.uk wrote:
Shouldn't the above be in patch 1 (or 1.5) rather than patch
On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 03:51:26PM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6dl.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6dl.dtsi
index 9e8ae11..65e54b4 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6dl.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6dl.dtsi
@@ -88,3 +88,7 @@
crtcs = ipu1 0, ipu1
On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 06:40:30PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
Another thing that my build testing (and use on cubox-i) picked up:
On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 03:51:26PM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6dl.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6dl.dtsi
index
On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
li...@arm.linux.org.uk wrote:
Shouldn't the above be in patch 1 (or 1.5) rather than patch 2? Patch 2
advertises itself as adding support for the wandboard, but in actual
fact it's adding the generic bits too.
Thanks for your review.
On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 7:50 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
li...@arm.linux.org.uk wrote:
Okay, next question(s).
1. How well tested is any of this imx-drm stuff?
2. What sort of testing has it been subject to?
Most of my tests with the imx-drm driver have been through the LVDS
panel so far.
Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam fabio.este...@freescale.com
---
Changes since v1:
- None
arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6dl.dtsi| 4
arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi | 4
arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6qdl-wandboard.dtsi | 13 +
arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6qdl.dtsi | 10
