On Thursday 26 May 2005 1:46 pm, Botond Botyanszki wrote:
> On Wed, 25 May 2005 16:39:38 -0700
> David Brownell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > OK, here's a minor update to the patches I posted
> > sorry! Here are the right ones.
>
> Thanks, these work nicely.
> Would be cool if it could b
On Wed, 25 May 2005 16:39:38 -0700
David Brownell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > OK, here's a minor update to the patches I posted
> sorry! Here are the right ones.
Thanks, these work nicely.
Would be cool if it could be merged before the 2.6.12 release.
--
On Wednesday 25 May 2005 2:00 am, Botond Botyanszki wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 24 May 2005 18:58:28 -0700
> David Brownell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > OK, here's a minor update to the patches I posted
>
> Hmm, I can't find the update.
> These are the exact same patches that you posted on the
OK, here's a minor update to the patches I posted ... basically just
removing code: (a) IRQ triggering is gone, now documented as an issue
for platform device setup to addres, (b) no more claiming of i/o or mem
regions, which didin't solve any problems the irq claiming wouldn't.
Also the ordering
On Sun, 22 May 2005 11:58:23 -0700
David Brownell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > From a quick glance it seems that the data/addr resources are
> > requested twice, both in sl811_cs via platform_device_register() and
> > then in the probe function of the hcd driver but the release order is
> > diff
On Sunday 22 May 2005 11:58 am, David Brownell wrote:
> > The second issue is some irq problem that the new changes in sl811-hcd.c
> > introduced.
> > When plugging in a usb device, it is recognized only after a few seconds
> > of delay and unplugging goes unnoticed frequently, resulting in variou
> > OK, as promised: here's an updated version, split into two patches,
> > which I'd like you to test.
>
> I tested the patch and there are some issues.
Testing will find those sometimes ... :)
> From a quick glance it seems that the data/addr resources are requested
> twice, both in sl811_c
On Sat, 21 May 2005 21:07:37 -0700
David Brownell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Saturday 14 May 2005 8:23 am, Botond Botyanszki wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I've ported the old sl811_cs driver to use the new sl811-hcd code in
> > 2.6. There are quite a few people with the RATOC REX-CFU1 usb compac
On Saturday 14 May 2005 8:23 am, Botond Botyanszki wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've ported the old sl811_cs driver to use the new sl811-hcd code in 2.6.
> There are quite a few people with the RATOC REX-CFU1 usb compact flash
> card on PDAs who would benefit from this.
> I have tested the driver on arm (z
On Saturday 14 May 2005 3:33 pm, Botond Botyanszki wrote:
> On Sat, 14 May 2005 13:22:11 -0700
> David Brownell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > It really ought to be
> > possible to have PCMCIA be an even thinner wrapper around that
> > platform device, and not need PCMCIA-specific stuff in the m
On Sat, 14 May 2005 13:22:11 -0700
David Brownell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It really ought to be
> possible to have PCMCIA be an even thinner wrapper around that
> platform device, and not need PCMCIA-specific stuff in the main
> body of the driver.
I guess you mean the pcmcia_driver registrat
On Saturday 14 May 2005 8:23 am, Botond Botyanszki wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've ported the old sl811_cs driver to use the new sl811-hcd code in 2.6.
> There are quite a few people with the RATOC REX-CFU1 usb compact flash
> card on PDAs who would benefit from this.
> I have tested the driver on arm (z
12 matches
Mail list logo
