On 3/26/2024 12:26 PM, Jani Nikula wrote:
On Tue, 26 Mar 2024, "Nautiyal, Ankit K" wrote:
On 3/25/2024 8:48 PM, Jani Nikula wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2024, Ankit Nautiyal wrote:
Currently we probe for lspcon, inside lspcon init. Which does 2 things:
probe the lspcon and set the expected
On Tue, 26 Mar 2024, "Nautiyal, Ankit K" wrote:
> On 3/25/2024 8:48 PM, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> On Fri, 22 Mar 2024, Ankit Nautiyal wrote:
>>> Currently we probe for lspcon, inside lspcon init. Which does 2 things:
>>> probe the lspcon and set the expected LS/PCON mode.
>>>
>>> If there is no
On 3/25/2024 8:48 PM, Jani Nikula wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2024, Ankit Nautiyal wrote:
Currently we probe for lspcon, inside lspcon init. Which does 2 things:
probe the lspcon and set the expected LS/PCON mode.
If there is no lspcon connected, the probe expectedly fails and
results in error
On Fri, 22 Mar 2024, Ankit Nautiyal wrote:
> Currently we probe for lspcon, inside lspcon init. Which does 2 things:
> probe the lspcon and set the expected LS/PCON mode.
>
> If there is no lspcon connected, the probe expectedly fails and
> results in error message. This inturn gets propogated to
Currently we probe for lspcon, inside lspcon init. Which does 2 things:
probe the lspcon and set the expected LS/PCON mode.
If there is no lspcon connected, the probe expectedly fails and
results in error message. This inturn gets propogated to
lspcon init and we get again error message for
