On Thu, 7 Aug 2008, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Aug 2008, Amol Lad wrote:
> > > Probably nobody noticed as this part of the code takes care of the
> > > `obsolete-style' parameters. `module_param' is the new way.
> >
> > Ohh, btw how module_param is different from obsolete style
> > para
On Thu, 7 Aug 2008, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Aug 2008, Amol Lad wrote:
> > > Probably nobody noticed as this part of the code takes care of the
> > > `obsolete-style' parameters. `module_param' is the new way.
> >
> > Ohh, btw how module_param is different from obsolete style paramate
On Thu, 7 Aug 2008, Amol Lad wrote:
> > Probably nobody noticed as this part of the code takes care of the
> > `obsolete-style' parameters. `module_param' is the new way.
>
> Ohh, btw how module_param is different from obsolete style paramaters
> ? Do we need to pass arguments to kernel from bootl
> Probably nobody noticed as this part of the code takes care of the
> `obsolete-style' parameters. `module_param' is the new way.
Ohh, btw how module_param is different from obsolete style paramaters
? Do we need to pass arguments to kernel from bootloader using a
different method for getting the
On Thu, 7 Aug 2008, Amol Lad wrote:
> It seems that there is a small problem when kernel parses the command
> line passed by u-boot.
It doesn't seem to be specific to u-boot...
> For example, when I add "board=myboard boardid=1" in the command line
> and register handler in kernel as __setup("boa
Hi,
It seems that there is a small problem when kernel parses the command
line passed by u-boot.
For example, when I add "board=myboard boardid=1" in the command line
and register handler in kernel as __setup("board", board_setup), then
the board_setup function is called twice : once with argumen
