Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> Will integrated sensors on DG965 motherboard be supported?
> They can be accessed only through the
> HECI interface, but the board has no AMT, and even if it had one, I don't
> think AMT includes HW sensors.
While talking about AMT ...
While talking about AMT: One
Maxim Levitsky wrote:
Will integrated sensors on DG965 motherboard be supported?
They can be accessed only through the
HECI interface, but the board has no AMT, and even if it had one, I don't
think AMT includes HW sensors.
While talking about AMT ...
ad
While talking about AMT: One quite
On Die, 2007-10-23 at 15:35 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 11:22:50AM -0700, Roland Dreier wrote:
> > It's not a hard experiment to do.
> >
> > The answer is:
> >
> > warning: suggest parentheses around assignment used as truth value
>
> A warning is not an error.
On Die, 2007-10-23 at 15:35 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 11:22:50AM -0700, Roland Dreier wrote:
It's not a hard experiment to do.
The answer is:
warning: suggest parentheses around assignment used as truth value
A warning is not an error. It won't
On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 11:22:50AM -0700, Roland Dreier wrote:
> It's not a hard experiment to do.
>
> The answer is:
>
> warning: suggest parentheses around assignment used as truth value
A warning is not an error. It won't abort the compile.
The warning (which I don't remember gcc doing
> What does gcc have to say about if (foo = 0){ rather than if (foo == 0){
It's not a hard experiment to do.
The answer is:
warning: suggest parentheses around assignment used as truth value
- R.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a
On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 09:23:33AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> gcc will tell you in the other direction just as well.
>
> and people read from left to right (at least in english) so coding in
> that direction is generally preferred in the Linux kernel as well.
What does gcc have to say
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 11:04:29 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lennart Sorensen) wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 11:40:01AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > - Here:
> >
> > + if (0 == memcmp(_wd_guid,
> >
> > we boringly prefer "if (foo == 0)" rather than "if (0 == foo)". (lots
> > of
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 11:04:29 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lennart Sorensen) wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 11:40:01AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > - Here:
> >
> > + if (0 == memcmp(_wd_guid,
> >
> > we boringly prefer "if (foo == 0)" rather than "if (0 == foo)".
> > (lots of
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 09:31:07 -0400 Anas Nashif <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew,
>
> Thanks for the feedback.
>
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 13:22:38 -0400 Anas Nashif <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> The patch is large so I'm placing the diff on the web for download
>
On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 11:40:01AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> - Here:
>
> + if (0 == memcmp(_wd_guid,
>
> we boringly prefer "if (foo == 0)" rather than "if (0 == foo)". (lots
> of places).
But 0 == blah is safer. If you accidentally do 0 = blah the compiler
will tell you.
On Tuesday 23 October 2007 15:35:37 Anas Nashif wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> >
> > Will integrated sensors on DG965 motherboard be supported?
> > They can be accessed only through the
> > HECI interface, but the board has no AMT, and even if it had one, I don't
> > think AMT
On Tuesday 23 October 2007 15:31:07 Anas Nashif wrote:
> Andrew,
>
> Thanks for the feedback.
>
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 13:22:38 -0400 Anas Nashif <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> The patch is large so I'm placing the diff on the web for download
> >> rather than
Hi,
Maxim Levitsky wrote:
Will integrated sensors on DG965 motherboard be supported?
They can be accessed only through the
HECI interface, but the board has no AMT, and even if it had one, I don't
think AMT includes HW sensors.
True, this is supported using QST.
Will it be supported?
Andrew,
Thanks for the feedback.
Andrew Morton wrote:
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 13:22:38 -0400 Anas Nashif <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The patch is large so I'm placing the diff on the web for download
rather than attaching it here. Download:
http://download.openamt.org/intel-MEI.diff
Please
Andrew,
Thanks for the feedback.
Andrew Morton wrote:
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 13:22:38 -0400 Anas Nashif [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The patch is large so I'm placing the diff on the web for download
rather than attaching it here. Download:
http://download.openamt.org/intel-MEI.diff
Please get
Hi,
Maxim Levitsky wrote:
Will integrated sensors on DG965 motherboard be supported?
They can be accessed only through the
HECI interface, but the board has no AMT, and even if it had one, I don't
think AMT includes HW sensors.
True, this is supported using QST.
Will it be supported?
On Tuesday 23 October 2007 15:35:37 Anas Nashif wrote:
Hi,
Maxim Levitsky wrote:
Will integrated sensors on DG965 motherboard be supported?
They can be accessed only through the
HECI interface, but the board has no AMT, and even if it had one, I don't
think AMT includes HW sensors.
On Tuesday 23 October 2007 15:31:07 Anas Nashif wrote:
Andrew,
Thanks for the feedback.
Andrew Morton wrote:
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 13:22:38 -0400 Anas Nashif [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The patch is large so I'm placing the diff on the web for download
rather than attaching it here.
On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 11:40:01AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
- Here:
+ if (0 == memcmp(heci_wd_guid,
we boringly prefer if (foo == 0) rather than if (0 == foo). (lots
of places).
But 0 == blah is safer. If you accidentally do 0 = blah the compiler
will tell you. Just
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 09:31:07 -0400 Anas Nashif [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew,
Thanks for the feedback.
Andrew Morton wrote:
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 13:22:38 -0400 Anas Nashif [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The patch is large so I'm placing the diff on the web for download
rather than
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 11:04:29 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lennart Sorensen) wrote:
On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 11:40:01AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
- Here:
+ if (0 == memcmp(heci_wd_guid,
we boringly prefer if (foo == 0) rather than if (0 == foo).
(lots of places).
But 0
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 11:04:29 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lennart Sorensen) wrote:
On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 11:40:01AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
- Here:
+ if (0 == memcmp(heci_wd_guid,
we boringly prefer if (foo == 0) rather than if (0 == foo). (lots
of places).
But
On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 09:23:33AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
gcc will tell you in the other direction just as well.
and people read from left to right (at least in english) so coding in
that direction is generally preferred in the Linux kernel as well.
What does gcc have to say about if
What does gcc have to say about if (foo = 0){ rather than if (foo == 0){
It's not a hard experiment to do.
The answer is:
warning: suggest parentheses around assignment used as truth value
- R.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a
On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 11:22:50AM -0700, Roland Dreier wrote:
It's not a hard experiment to do.
The answer is:
warning: suggest parentheses around assignment used as truth value
A warning is not an error. It won't abort the compile.
The warning (which I don't remember gcc doing in
On Monday 22 October 2007 19:22:38 Anas Nashif wrote:
> The Manageability Engine Interface (aka HECI) allows applications to
> communicate with the Intel(R) Manageability Engine (ME) firmware.
>
> It is meant to be used by user-space manageability applications to
> access ME features such as
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 13:22:38 -0400 Anas Nashif <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The Manageability Engine Interface (aka HECI) allows applications to
> communicate with the Intel(R) Manageability Engine (ME) firmware.
>
> It is meant to be used by user-space manageability applications to
> access ME
Hi,
Le lundi 22 octobre 2007 à 13:22 -0400, Anas Nashif a écrit :
> The Manageability Engine Interface (aka HECI) allows applications to
> communicate with the Intel(R) Manageability Engine (ME) firmware.
>
> It is meant to be used by user-space manageability applications to
> access ME
The Manageability Engine Interface (aka HECI) allows applications to
communicate with the Intel(R) Manageability Engine (ME) firmware.
It is meant to be used by user-space manageability applications to
access ME features such as Intel(R) Active Management Technology,
Intel(R) Quiet System
The Manageability Engine Interface (aka HECI) allows applications to
communicate with the Intel(R) Manageability Engine (ME) firmware.
It is meant to be used by user-space manageability applications to
access ME features such as Intel(R) Active Management Technology,
Intel(R) Quiet System
Hi,
Le lundi 22 octobre 2007 à 13:22 -0400, Anas Nashif a écrit :
The Manageability Engine Interface (aka HECI) allows applications to
communicate with the Intel(R) Manageability Engine (ME) firmware.
It is meant to be used by user-space manageability applications to
access ME features
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 13:22:38 -0400 Anas Nashif [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Manageability Engine Interface (aka HECI) allows applications to
communicate with the Intel(R) Manageability Engine (ME) firmware.
It is meant to be used by user-space manageability applications to
access ME
On Monday 22 October 2007 19:22:38 Anas Nashif wrote:
The Manageability Engine Interface (aka HECI) allows applications to
communicate with the Intel(R) Manageability Engine (ME) firmware.
It is meant to be used by user-space manageability applications to
access ME features such as Intel(R)
34 matches
Mail list logo
