On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 12:45 +0100, Pawel Moll wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 12:34 +0100, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 9 October 2012 16:24, Pawel Moll wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 11:42 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
> > >> Robin raised a valid point that this driver is TC2 specific and
On 9 October 2012 22:30, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> Perhaps I misunderstood the bug, I though it was just a name getting
> truncated and was otherwise harmless. If it's causing real problems then
> I'll apply the original suggested patch and not worry about other
> cosmetic renaming issues.
No
On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 22:15 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 9 October 2012 21:02, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > Considering the confusion over what the correct naming should be, I
> > don't think it's worth me apply the renaming patch at the moment ;-)
>
> This thread went into another direction
On 9 October 2012 21:02, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> Considering the confusion over what the correct naming should be, I
> don't think it's worth me apply the renaming patch at the moment ;-)
This thread went into another direction, than the one it was intended for :)
Looks correct, would be be
On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 11:42 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
> On 09/10/12 11:33, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> >> On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 09:27 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
> >>> On 09/10/12 08:10, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Followin
On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 12:34 +0100, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 9 October 2012 16:24, Pawel Moll wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 11:42 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
> >> Robin raised a valid point that this driver is TC2 specific and bL is
> >> not appropriate name for it including the file nam
On 9 October 2012 16:24, Pawel Moll wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 11:42 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
>> Robin raised a valid point that this driver is TC2 specific and bL is
>> not appropriate name for it including the file name(my bad choice at first).
>
> Just to be painfully precise ;-)
On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 11:42 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
> Robin raised a valid point that this driver is TC2 specific and bL is
> not appropriate name for it including the file name(my bad choice at first).
Just to be painfully precise ;-) I must say it's not TC2 specific, but
V2P-CA15_A7
On 09/10/12 11:33, Amit Kucheria wrote:
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 09:27 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
On 09/10/12 08:10, Viresh Kumar wrote:
Following is the declaration of name field in struct cpufreq_driver:
char name[CPUFREQ_NAME
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 09:27 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
>> On 09/10/12 08:10, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> > Following is the declaration of name field in struct cpufreq_driver:
>> > char name[CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN];
>> >
>> > where CPUFREQ
On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 09:27 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
> On 09/10/12 08:10, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > Following is the declaration of name field in struct cpufreq_driver:
> > char name[CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN];
> >
> > where CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN is 16.
> >
> > So, length of drivers name must be <=15 (o
On 09/10/12 08:10, Viresh Kumar wrote:
Following is the declaration of name field in struct cpufreq_driver:
char name[CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN];
where CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN is 16.
So, length of drivers name must be <=15 (one position for '\0').
Current name is crossing this limit and so name doesn't get pri
Following is the declaration of name field in struct cpufreq_driver:
char name[CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN];
where CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN is 16.
So, length of drivers name must be <=15 (one position for '\0').
Current name is crossing this limit and so name doesn't get printed properly
when we do:
$ cat /sys/dev
13 matches
Mail list logo
