On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 20:57:43, Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Tony Lindgren t...@atomide.com [120704 01:20]:
* Tony Lindgren t...@atomide.com [120704 00:29]:
* Vaibhav Hiremath hvaib...@ti.com [120703 06:12]:
Initially, we decided to make am33xx family of device to fall
under omap3 class
* Hiremath, Vaibhav hvaib...@ti.com [120710 01:43]:
Can we clean these branches; it is very confusing to track with so many
multiple versions?
Yeah I'll drop some after the merge window..
Also, One patch still has not merged is,
[PATCH-V2] ARM: OMAP: cpu: Make cpu_class_is_omap2 true
* Tony Lindgren t...@atomide.com [120704 01:20]:
* Tony Lindgren t...@atomide.com [120704 00:29]:
* Vaibhav Hiremath hvaib...@ti.com [120703 06:12]:
Initially, we decided to make am33xx family of device to fall
under omap3 class (cpu_is_omap34xx() = true), since it carries
Cortex-A8
* Vaibhav Hiremath hvaib...@ti.com [120703 06:12]:
Initially, we decided to make am33xx family of device to fall
under omap3 class (cpu_is_omap34xx() = true), since it carries
Cortex-A8 core. But while adding complete baseport support
(like, clock, power and hwmod) support, it is observed
* Tony Lindgren t...@atomide.com [120704 00:29]:
* Vaibhav Hiremath hvaib...@ti.com [120703 06:12]:
Initially, we decided to make am33xx family of device to fall
under omap3 class (cpu_is_omap34xx() = true), since it carries
Cortex-A8 core. But while adding complete baseport support
On Wed, Jul 04, 2012 at 12:54:54, Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Vaibhav Hiremath hvaib...@ti.com [120703 06:12]:
Initially, we decided to make am33xx family of device to fall
under omap3 class (cpu_is_omap34xx() = true), since it carries
Cortex-A8 core. But while adding complete baseport support
Initially, we decided to make am33xx family of device to fall
under omap3 class (cpu_is_omap34xx() = true), since it carries
Cortex-A8 core. But while adding complete baseport support
(like, clock, power and hwmod) support, it is observed that,
we are creating more and more problems by treating
On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 01:38:34, Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Vaibhav Hiremath hvaib...@ti.com [120508 08:32]:
--- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/Kconfig
@@ -123,8 +123,11 @@ config SOC_OMAPTI81XX
config SOC_OMAPAM33XX
bool AM33XX support
- depends on
Initially, we decided to make am33xx family of device to fall
under omap3 class (cpu_is_omap34xx() = true), since it carries
Cortex-A8 core. But while adding complete baseport support
(like, clock, power and hwmod) support, it is observed that,
we are creating more and more problems by treating
* Vaibhav Hiremath hvaib...@ti.com [120508 08:32]:
--- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/Kconfig
@@ -123,8 +123,11 @@ config SOC_OMAPTI81XX
config SOC_OMAPAM33XX
bool AM33XX support
- depends on ARCH_OMAP3
+ depends on ARCH_OMAP2PLUS
This is not
Vaibhav Hiremath hvaib...@ti.com writes:
Initially, we decided to make am33xx family of device to fall
under omap3 class (cpu_is_omap34xx() = true), since it carries
Cortex-A8 core. But while adding complete baseport support
(like, clock, power and hwmod) support, it is observed that,
we are
* Kevin Hilman khil...@ti.com [120508 15:00]:
Vaibhav Hiremath hvaib...@ti.com writes:
Initially, we decided to make am33xx family of device to fall
under omap3 class (cpu_is_omap34xx() = true), since it carries
Cortex-A8 core. But while adding complete baseport support
(like, clock,
12 matches
Mail list logo