On Fri, 2013-04-12 at 00:23 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Sorry for the delayed response.
No problem. I know you are busy. Thanks for the reply.
> On Wednesday, March 27, 2013 11:13:49 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-03-27 at 00:39 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
:
> > >
> > > What
On Fri, 2013-04-12 at 00:23 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
Sorry for the delayed response.
No problem. I know you are busy. Thanks for the reply.
On Wednesday, March 27, 2013 11:13:49 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
On Wed, 2013-03-27 at 00:39 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
:
What about
Sorry for the delayed response.
On Wednesday, March 27, 2013 11:13:49 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-03-27 at 00:39 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Tuesday, March 26, 2013 04:59:36 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2013-03-26 at 23:39 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On
Sorry for the delayed response.
On Wednesday, March 27, 2013 11:13:49 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
On Wed, 2013-03-27 at 00:39 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Tuesday, March 26, 2013 04:59:36 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
On Tue, 2013-03-26 at 23:39 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Tuesday, March
On Wed, 2013-03-27 at 00:39 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 26, 2013 04:59:36 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-03-26 at 23:39 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, March 26, 2013 09:42:06 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2013-03-26 at 14:04 +0100, Rafael J.
On Wed, 2013-03-27 at 00:39 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Tuesday, March 26, 2013 04:59:36 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
On Tue, 2013-03-26 at 23:39 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Tuesday, March 26, 2013 09:42:06 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
On Tue, 2013-03-26 at 14:04 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki
On Tuesday, March 26, 2013 04:59:36 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-03-26 at 23:39 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Tuesday, March 26, 2013 09:42:06 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2013-03-26 at 14:04 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Monday, February 25, 2013 02:02:10 PM
On Tue, 2013-03-26 at 23:39 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 26, 2013 09:42:06 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-03-26 at 14:04 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Monday, February 25, 2013 02:02:10 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > > > In order to eject a memory device object
On Tuesday, March 26, 2013 09:42:06 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-03-26 at 14:04 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday, February 25, 2013 02:02:10 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > > In order to eject a memory device object represented as "PNP0C80:%d"
> > > in sysfs, its associated memblocks
On Tue, 2013-03-26 at 14:04 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, February 25, 2013 02:02:10 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> > In order to eject a memory device object represented as "PNP0C80:%d"
> > in sysfs, its associated memblocks (system/memory/memory%d) need to
> > be off-lined. However,
On Monday, February 25, 2013 02:02:10 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> In order to eject a memory device object represented as "PNP0C80:%d"
> in sysfs, its associated memblocks (system/memory/memory%d) need to
> be off-lined. However, there is no user friendly way to correlate
> between a memory device
On Monday, February 25, 2013 02:02:10 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
In order to eject a memory device object represented as PNP0C80:%d
in sysfs, its associated memblocks (system/memory/memory%d) need to
be off-lined. However, there is no user friendly way to correlate
between a memory device object
On Tue, 2013-03-26 at 14:04 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Monday, February 25, 2013 02:02:10 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
In order to eject a memory device object represented as PNP0C80:%d
in sysfs, its associated memblocks (system/memory/memory%d) need to
be off-lined. However, there is no
On Tuesday, March 26, 2013 09:42:06 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
On Tue, 2013-03-26 at 14:04 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Monday, February 25, 2013 02:02:10 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
In order to eject a memory device object represented as PNP0C80:%d
in sysfs, its associated memblocks
On Tue, 2013-03-26 at 23:39 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Tuesday, March 26, 2013 09:42:06 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
On Tue, 2013-03-26 at 14:04 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Monday, February 25, 2013 02:02:10 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
In order to eject a memory device object represented
On Tuesday, March 26, 2013 04:59:36 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
On Tue, 2013-03-26 at 23:39 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Tuesday, March 26, 2013 09:42:06 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
On Tue, 2013-03-26 at 14:04 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Monday, February 25, 2013 02:02:10 PM Toshi Kani
On Tue, 2013-02-26 at 05:37 +, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
> 2013/02/26 6:02, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > In order to eject a memory device object represented as "PNP0C80:%d"
> > in sysfs, its associated memblocks (system/memory/memory%d) need to
> > be off-lined. However, there is no user friendly
On Tue, 2013-02-26 at 05:37 +, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
2013/02/26 6:02, Toshi Kani wrote:
In order to eject a memory device object represented as PNP0C80:%d
in sysfs, its associated memblocks (system/memory/memory%d) need to
be off-lined. However, there is no user friendly way to
2013/02/26 6:02, Toshi Kani wrote:
> In order to eject a memory device object represented as "PNP0C80:%d"
> in sysfs, its associated memblocks (system/memory/memory%d) need to
> be off-lined. However, there is no user friendly way to correlate
> between a memory device object and its memblocks in
In order to eject a memory device object represented as "PNP0C80:%d"
in sysfs, its associated memblocks (system/memory/memory%d) need to
be off-lined. However, there is no user friendly way to correlate
between a memory device object and its memblocks in sysfs.
This patch creates sysfs links to
2013/02/26 6:02, Toshi Kani wrote:
In order to eject a memory device object represented as PNP0C80:%d
in sysfs, its associated memblocks (system/memory/memory%d) need to
be off-lined. However, there is no user friendly way to correlate
between a memory device object and its memblocks in
In order to eject a memory device object represented as PNP0C80:%d
in sysfs, its associated memblocks (system/memory/memory%d) need to
be off-lined. However, there is no user friendly way to correlate
between a memory device object and its memblocks in sysfs.
This patch creates sysfs links to
22 matches
Mail list logo
