On Thu, 25 Apr 2013, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Lee Jones wrote:
>
> > Now DMA DT bindings exist and are in use by he MMC and UART drivers, it
> > should be possible to remove them from the auxdata structure. However,
> > after doing so the drivers fail. Something
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013, Linus Walleij wrote:
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Lee Jones lee.jo...@linaro.org wrote:
Now DMA DT bindings exist and are in use by he MMC and UART drivers, it
should be possible to remove them from the auxdata structure. However,
after doing so the drivers
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Lee Jones wrote:
> Now DMA DT bindings exist and are in use by he MMC and UART drivers, it
> should be possible to remove them from the auxdata structure. However,
> after doing so the drivers fail. Something must be reliant on the dev
> name applied by using
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Lee Jones lee.jo...@linaro.org wrote:
Now DMA DT bindings exist and are in use by he MMC and UART drivers, it
should be possible to remove them from the auxdata structure. However,
after doing so the drivers fail. Something must be reliant on the dev
name
Now DMA DT bindings exist and are in use by he MMC and UART drivers, it
should be possible to remove them from the auxdata structure. However,
after doing so the drivers fail. Something must be reliant on the dev
name applied by using auxdata; probably common clk.
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones
---
Now DMA DT bindings exist and are in use by he MMC and UART drivers, it
should be possible to remove them from the auxdata structure. However,
after doing so the drivers fail. Something must be reliant on the dev
name applied by using auxdata; probably common clk.
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones
6 matches
Mail list logo
