On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 12:54 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 07:15:59PM +0100, Radu Rendec wrote:
> > Thanks for the suggestion! That makes sense. I will start working on
> > converting i6300esb and submit a patch in a few days.
> >
> > By the way, I don't have the hardware.
On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 12:54 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 07:15:59PM +0100, Radu Rendec wrote:
> > Thanks for the suggestion! That makes sense. I will start working on
> > converting i6300esb and submit a patch in a few days.
> >
> > By the way, I don't have the hardware.
On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 07:15:59PM +0100, Radu Rendec wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-10-11 at 11:46 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 06:46:31PM +0100, Radu Rendec wrote:
> > > In a project I'm working on we have a valid use case where we activate
> > > both the i6300esb and softdog
On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 07:15:59PM +0100, Radu Rendec wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-10-11 at 11:46 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 06:46:31PM +0100, Radu Rendec wrote:
> > > In a project I'm working on we have a valid use case where we activate
> > > both the i6300esb and softdog
On Wed, 2017-10-11 at 11:46 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 06:46:31PM +0100, Radu Rendec wrote:
> > In a project I'm working on we have a valid use case where we activate
> > both the i6300esb and softdog watchdogs. We always activate i6300esb
> > first (which uses the
On Wed, 2017-10-11 at 11:46 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 06:46:31PM +0100, Radu Rendec wrote:
> > In a project I'm working on we have a valid use case where we activate
> > both the i6300esb and softdog watchdogs. We always activate i6300esb
> > first (which uses the
On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 06:46:31PM +0100, Radu Rendec wrote:
> Hello,
>
> In a project I'm working on we have a valid use case where we activate
> both the i6300esb and softdog watchdogs. We always activate i6300esb
> first (which uses the "legacy" watchdog API) and then softdog. This
> gets us
On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 06:46:31PM +0100, Radu Rendec wrote:
> Hello,
>
> In a project I'm working on we have a valid use case where we activate
> both the i6300esb and softdog watchdogs. We always activate i6300esb
> first (which uses the "legacy" watchdog API) and then softdog. This
> gets us
Hello,
In a project I'm working on we have a valid use case where we activate
both the i6300esb and softdog watchdogs. We always activate i6300esb
first (which uses the "legacy" watchdog API) and then softdog. This
gets us two "error" level messages (coming from watchdog_cdev_register)
although
Hello,
In a project I'm working on we have a valid use case where we activate
both the i6300esb and softdog watchdogs. We always activate i6300esb
first (which uses the "legacy" watchdog API) and then softdog. This
gets us two "error" level messages (coming from watchdog_cdev_register)
although
10 matches
Mail list logo