On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 06:15:15AM +0800, Li, Aubrey wrote:
> On 2014/3/3 23:58, David E. Box wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 03:01:45PM +0800, Li, Aubrey wrote:
> >> Hi David,
> >>
> >> I'm probably too late to catch this thread. Just one question, what's
> >> the relationship between
> >>a
On 2014/3/3 23:58, David E. Box wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 03:01:45PM +0800, Li, Aubrey wrote:
>> Hi David,
>>
>> I'm probably too late to catch this thread. Just one question, what's
>> the relationship between
>> arch/x86/kernel/iosf_mbi.c
>> and
>> drivers/platform/x86/intel_bayt
On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 03:01:45PM +0800, Li, Aubrey wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> I'm probably too late to catch this thread. Just one question, what's
> the relationship between
> arch/x86/kernel/iosf_mbi.c
> and
> drivers/platform/x86/intel_baytrail.c
>
iosf_mbi.c is the version that went
Hi David,
I'm probably too late to catch this thread. Just one question, what's
the relationship between
arch/x86/kernel/iosf_mbi.c
and
drivers/platform/x86/intel_baytrail.c
Thanks,
-Aubrey
On 2014/3/1 10:40, David E. Box wrote:
> From: "David E. Box"
>
> This patch series adds
From: "David E. Box"
This patch series adds missing functionalty that mostly affected loadable
modules.
The first patch adds dummy functions to allow drivers not completely
dependant on the IOSF MBI driver to compile on systems that don't have it.
The second makes MBI driver built in.
Changes
5 matches
Mail list logo