On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 10:30:11PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
> Okay, I've got a theory about what the issue is now. The .map()
> callback is failing (returning non-zero) for one of the hwirqs. The
> new code is stricter about associations, and actually unwinds the
> associations if one of them
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 10:30:11PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
Okay, I've got a theory about what the issue is now. The .map()
callback is failing (returning non-zero) for one of the hwirqs. The
new code is stricter about associations, and actually unwinds the
associations if one of them
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 10:10 AM, Mark Brown
wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 07:57:49PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>> -next fails to boot for me today on my s3c64xx based systems. Walking
>> back to the last time I tried and bisecting likely branches I find that
>> commit 910139 (irqdomain:
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 10:10 AM, Mark Brown
broo...@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 07:57:49PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
-next fails to boot for me today on my s3c64xx based systems. Walking
back to the last time I tried and bisecting likely branches I find that
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 10:10 AM, Mark Brown
wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 07:57:49PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>> -next fails to boot for me today on my s3c64xx based systems. Walking
>> back to the last time I tried and bisecting likely branches I find that
>> commit 910139 (irqdomain:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 07:57:49PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> -next fails to boot for me today on my s3c64xx based systems. Walking
> back to the last time I tried and bisecting likely branches I find that
> commit 910139 (irqdomain: Replace LEGACY mapping with LINEAR) is the one
> that
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:52:30AM +0900, Paul Mundt wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 07:57:49PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > -next fails to boot for me today on my s3c64xx based systems. Walking
> > back to the last time I tried and bisecting likely branches I find that
> > commit 910139
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:52:30AM +0900, Paul Mundt wrote:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 07:57:49PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
-next fails to boot for me today on my s3c64xx based systems. Walking
back to the last time I tried and bisecting likely branches I find that
commit 910139 (irqdomain:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 07:57:49PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
-next fails to boot for me today on my s3c64xx based systems. Walking
back to the last time I tried and bisecting likely branches I find that
commit 910139 (irqdomain: Replace LEGACY mapping with LINEAR) is the one
that introduces
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 10:10 AM, Mark Brown
broo...@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 07:57:49PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
-next fails to boot for me today on my s3c64xx based systems. Walking
back to the last time I tried and bisecting likely branches I find that
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 07:57:49PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> -next fails to boot for me today on my s3c64xx based systems. Walking
> back to the last time I tried and bisecting likely branches I find that
> commit 910139 (irqdomain: Replace LEGACY mapping with LINEAR) is the one
> that
-next fails to boot for me today on my s3c64xx based systems. Walking
back to the last time I tried and bisecting likely branches I find that
commit 910139 (irqdomain: Replace LEGACY mapping with LINEAR) is the one
that introduces the build break. Unfortunately the boot fails before I
get a
-next fails to boot for me today on my s3c64xx based systems. Walking
back to the last time I tried and bisecting likely branches I find that
commit 910139 (irqdomain: Replace LEGACY mapping with LINEAR) is the one
that introduces the build break. Unfortunately the boot fails before I
get a
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 07:57:49PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
-next fails to boot for me today on my s3c64xx based systems. Walking
back to the last time I tried and bisecting likely branches I find that
commit 910139 (irqdomain: Replace LEGACY mapping with LINEAR) is the one
that introduces
14 matches
Mail list logo