On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 09:56:55PM +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 06 February 2013, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> >
> > I haven't looked into it, but I doubt if that is possible without large
> > effort, if at all. s390 doesn't have any irq chips, nor something like
> > edge or level
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 09:56:55PM +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Wednesday 06 February 2013, Heiko Carstens wrote:
I haven't looked into it, but I doubt if that is possible without large
effort, if at all. s390 doesn't have any irq chips, nor something like
edge or level triggered irqs.
At Thu, 7 Feb 2013 14:32:06 +0100,
Heiko Carstens wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 09:56:55PM +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Wednesday 06 February 2013, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 06:26:02PM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > > > At Thu, 07 Feb 2013 02:13:19 +0100,
> >
On Thursday 07 February 2013 14:32:06 Heiko Carstens wrote:
>
> That sounds reasonable. And a quick grep seems to indicate that s390
> is the last architecture with !GENERIC_HARDIRQS.
> However having two completely different IRQ subsystems within one
> architecture will bring up some interesting
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 09:56:55PM +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 06 February 2013, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 06:26:02PM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > > At Thu, 07 Feb 2013 02:13:19 +0100,
> > > Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > > Why not just make
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 09:56:55PM +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Wednesday 06 February 2013, Heiko Carstens wrote:
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 06:26:02PM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
At Thu, 07 Feb 2013 02:13:19 +0100,
Arnd Bergmann wrote:
Why not just make CONFIG_GENERIC_HARDIRQS
On Thursday 07 February 2013 14:32:06 Heiko Carstens wrote:
That sounds reasonable. And a quick grep seems to indicate that s390
is the last architecture with !GENERIC_HARDIRQS.
However having two completely different IRQ subsystems within one
architecture will bring up some interesting
At Thu, 7 Feb 2013 14:32:06 +0100,
Heiko Carstens wrote:
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 09:56:55PM +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Wednesday 06 February 2013, Heiko Carstens wrote:
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 06:26:02PM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
At Thu, 07 Feb 2013 02:13:19 +0100,
Arnd
On Wednesday 06 February 2013, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 06:26:02PM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > At Thu, 07 Feb 2013 02:13:19 +0100,
> > Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > No, it is intentional that the CONFIG_HAS_IOPORT symbol refers to
> > > the fact that you can use the
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 06:26:02PM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> At Thu, 07 Feb 2013 02:13:19 +0100,
> Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Wednesday 06 February 2013 18:05:14 Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > > At Wed, 6 Feb 2013 17:24:00 +0100,
> > > Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > > #if defined(CONFIG_HAS_IOPORT) &&
At Thu, 07 Feb 2013 02:13:19 +0100,
Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 06 February 2013 18:05:14 Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > At Wed, 6 Feb 2013 17:24:00 +0100,
> > Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > >
> > > Fix these two compile errors on s390 which does not have HAS_IOPORT
> > > nor GENERIC_HARDIRQS:
>
On Wednesday 06 February 2013 18:05:14 Takashi Iwai wrote:
> At Wed, 6 Feb 2013 17:24:00 +0100,
> Heiko Carstens wrote:
> >
> > Fix these two compile errors on s390 which does not have HAS_IOPORT
> > nor GENERIC_HARDIRQS:
> >
> > sound/pci/lx6464es/lx6464es.c: In function ‘snd_lx6464es_free’:
>
At Wed, 6 Feb 2013 17:24:00 +0100,
Heiko Carstens wrote:
>
> Fix these two compile errors on s390 which does not have HAS_IOPORT
> nor GENERIC_HARDIRQS:
>
> sound/pci/lx6464es/lx6464es.c: In function ‘snd_lx6464es_free’:
> sound/pci/lx6464es/lx6464es.c:565:2: error: implicit declaration of
Fix these two compile errors on s390 which does not have HAS_IOPORT
nor GENERIC_HARDIRQS:
sound/pci/lx6464es/lx6464es.c: In function ‘snd_lx6464es_free’:
sound/pci/lx6464es/lx6464es.c:565:2: error: implicit declaration of function
‘ioport_unmap’
sound/soc/codecs/wm8903.c: In function
Fix these two compile errors on s390 which does not have HAS_IOPORT
nor GENERIC_HARDIRQS:
sound/pci/lx6464es/lx6464es.c: In function ‘snd_lx6464es_free’:
sound/pci/lx6464es/lx6464es.c:565:2: error: implicit declaration of function
‘ioport_unmap’
sound/soc/codecs/wm8903.c: In function
At Wed, 6 Feb 2013 17:24:00 +0100,
Heiko Carstens wrote:
Fix these two compile errors on s390 which does not have HAS_IOPORT
nor GENERIC_HARDIRQS:
sound/pci/lx6464es/lx6464es.c: In function ‘snd_lx6464es_free’:
sound/pci/lx6464es/lx6464es.c:565:2: error: implicit declaration of function
On Wednesday 06 February 2013 18:05:14 Takashi Iwai wrote:
At Wed, 6 Feb 2013 17:24:00 +0100,
Heiko Carstens wrote:
Fix these two compile errors on s390 which does not have HAS_IOPORT
nor GENERIC_HARDIRQS:
sound/pci/lx6464es/lx6464es.c: In function ‘snd_lx6464es_free’:
At Thu, 07 Feb 2013 02:13:19 +0100,
Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Wednesday 06 February 2013 18:05:14 Takashi Iwai wrote:
At Wed, 6 Feb 2013 17:24:00 +0100,
Heiko Carstens wrote:
Fix these two compile errors on s390 which does not have HAS_IOPORT
nor GENERIC_HARDIRQS:
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 06:26:02PM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
At Thu, 07 Feb 2013 02:13:19 +0100,
Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Wednesday 06 February 2013 18:05:14 Takashi Iwai wrote:
At Wed, 6 Feb 2013 17:24:00 +0100,
Heiko Carstens wrote:
#if defined(CONFIG_HAS_IOPORT)
On Wednesday 06 February 2013, Heiko Carstens wrote:
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 06:26:02PM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
At Thu, 07 Feb 2013 02:13:19 +0100,
Arnd Bergmann wrote:
No, it is intentional that the CONFIG_HAS_IOPORT symbol refers to
the fact that you can use the ioport_map
20 matches
Mail list logo