It seems okay to me on first reading.
On 6/13/2013 7:53 AM, Daniel Drake wrote:
> Hi Mitch,
>
> As mentioned, upstream now has APBC/APMU clock drivers, and I think there
> are a couple of things in way that clock-dt.c interacts with the common
> clock framework that upstream wouldn't approve of.
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Paul Fox wrote:
> does this imply a future flag day, at which time new firmware will be
> incompatible with old kernels, and vice-versa?
Unfortunately even without the DT changes described here, old firmware
versions already will not be able to boot new/upstream
daniel wrote:
> Hi Mitch,
>
> As mentioned, upstream now has APBC/APMU clock drivers, and I think there
> are a couple of things in way that clock-dt.c interacts with the common
> clock framework that upstream wouldn't approve of.
>
> Here is my first attempt at a new approach, using the n
Hi Mitch,
As mentioned, upstream now has APBC/APMU clock drivers, and I think there
are a couple of things in way that clock-dt.c interacts with the common
clock framework that upstream wouldn't approve of.
Here is my first attempt at a new approach, using the new upstream clock
drivers, and usin
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 8:08 PM, Juan Cubillo wrote:
> Thank you for the info!
>
> Yeah the ../docs/... was a typo... I was looking inside ../doc/
>
> I also always wondered why the wiki instructions didn't used yum to install
> the software... another mystery solved!
That is mainly because the w
