I pushed the Mesa UART driver yesterday. (and messed up a very minor push to 2,5, and hope that isn't bad)
Anyway, this is what I sent to IRC but got no reply in the time I was on.. The UART thing. I just realised that I can use the names= built-in thing in comp to give the pins and uarts meaningful names. The drawback is that the functions get the same names. I can't decide whether that is good or bad. Currenlty loadrt mesa_uart uart_names=hm2_5i23.0.uart.0, hm2_5i23.0.uart.7 gives you functions and pins mesa_uart.0… and mesa_uart.1…. so the HAL names are sequential, even if the UARTs they control are not. (The UARTs could in theory be on different card, so hm2_5i23.0.uart.0 and hm2_7i43.uart.2 and Hm2_3x20.uart.11... If I drop uart_names as a modparam and use names= instead then the functions and pins all become hm2_5i23.uart.0… and hm2_5i23.7…. I am of the opinion that this is better (and it makes the sample .comp file simpler). Should I change it? note that the sample .comp is not intended to be of any practical use. -- atp If you can't fix it, you don't own it. http://www.ifixit.com/Manifesto ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
