On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 7:38 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> It's usually done:
>
> Acked-by: Rusty Russell (virtio_ids.h)
>
> And I've added it to the next version of the virtio-spec, so noone else
> grabs it.
Great, thanks a lot !
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-om
On Thu, 8 Dec 2011 09:50:59 +0200, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
> Hi Rusty,
>
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 3:33 AM, Rusty Russell
> > wrote:
> >> That would imply that I'd done more than glance over them, and
> >> unfortunately I haven't :(
> >
Hi Rusty,
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 3:33 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
>> That would imply that I'd done more than glance over them, and
>> unfortunately I haven't :(
>
> Np, thanks for glancing :)
I'd still like to ask for your Ack at least fo
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 12:09 AM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> Yes, I did realize it's not used in the code. I just wanted to prevent what
> I considered a misuse of "AMP". Thanks for accommodating my request.
Sure thing, and thanks for the feedback.
Dropping the 'amp' prefix also went well with my g
On 11/24/2011 12:43 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 10:28 PM, Saravana Kannan
wrote:
remoteproc would probably be the best fit since it's already used in the
code and people are used to discussing about it.
Guys you realize that 'amp' isn't really being used in the code
its
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 10:28 PM, Saravana Kannan
wrote:
> remoteproc would probably be the best fit since it's already used in the
> code and people are used to discussing about it.
Guys you realize that 'amp' isn't really being used in the code
itself; this discussion boils down to the text we
On 11/23/2011 08:10 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 12:27:31PM +0200, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 5:25 AM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
Sorry for the rant, this naming just rubs me the wrong way. I definitely
appreciate the idea behind these patches.
I don't shar
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 12:27:31PM +0200, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 5:25 AM, Saravana Kannan
> wrote:
> > Sorry for the rant, this naming just rubs me the wrong way. I definitely
> > appreciate the idea behind these patches.
> I don't share the same naming concerns you hav
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 5:25 AM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> Sorry for the rant, this naming just rubs me the wrong way. I definitely
> appreciate the idea behind these patches.
I don't share the same naming concerns you have (if any, then
confusion with the bluetooth AMP patches and prefixes is mor
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 3:33 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> That would imply that I'd done more than glance over them, and
> unfortunately I haven't :(
Np, thanks for glancing :)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel
On 10/25/2011 02:48 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
Modern SoCs typically employ a central symmetric multiprocessing (SMP)
application processor running Linux, with several other asymmetric
multiprocessing (AMP) heterogeneous processors running different instances
of operating system, whether Linux or
On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 13:40:04 +0200, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
> At this point I know of at least four vendors (besides TI) who are
> actively looking into supporting this, and it's getting a bit hard to
> collaborate, so I plan to get this into linux-next later this week
> (minus the virtio-spec.txt c
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 6:00 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 11:48:19 +0200, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
>> Modern SoCs typically employ a central symmetric multiprocessing (SMP)
>> application processor running Linux, with several other asymmetric
>> multiprocessing (AMP) heterogeneous
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 6:00 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> virtio-spec.txt is a derived document, so I'd prefer that patch to go
> through me so I can patch the (LyX) master copy.
Sure thing, I'll probably just submit changes against virtio-spec.txt
separately then.
Thanks,
Ohad.
--
To unsubscribe
On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 11:48:19 +0200, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
> Modern SoCs typically employ a central symmetric multiprocessing (SMP)
> application processor running Linux, with several other asymmetric
> multiprocessing (AMP) heterogeneous processors running different instances
> of operating system
Modern SoCs typically employ a central symmetric multiprocessing (SMP)
application processor running Linux, with several other asymmetric
multiprocessing (AMP) heterogeneous processors running different instances
of operating system, whether Linux or any other flavor of real-time OS.
OMAP4, for ex
16 matches
Mail list logo
