On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 6:11 PM, Scott Wood scottw...@freescale.com wrote:
On 08/15/2011 10:59 AM, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
On Tue, 2011-07-12 at 12:48 +0800, b35...@freescale.com wrote:
+ /*
+ * Hack for supporting the flash chip whose writesize is
+ * larger than 2K bytes.
+
On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 05:31:22PM -0500, Timur Tabi wrote:
Audio support for the MPC5200 exists, so enable it by default.
Signed-off-by: Timur Tabi ti...@freescale.com
Yup, I like to have the PCM030 in a working state
Acked-by: Wolfram Sang w.s...@pengutronix.de
--
Pengutronix e.K.
Hi Rob, Grant,
On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 18:22:36 -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
Grant,
On 08/05/2011 05:54 PM, Grant Likely wrote:
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 04:24:26PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
From: Rob Herring rob.herr...@calxeda.com
All callers of of_i2c_register_devices are immediately
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
bige...@linutronix.de wrote:
* Pratyush Anand | 2011-08-30 17:28:01 [+0530]:
diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/io.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/io.h
index 815efa2..32282b4 100644
--- a/arch/arm/include/asm/io.h
+++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/io.h
On Tue, 2011-08-30 at 17:28 +0530, Pratyush Anand wrote:
There are some peripheral(e.g dwc otg) whose registers can be configured to
work in either little or big endian mode. Therefor macros like out_be32,
in_be32, out_le32 and in_le32 have been added to support such peripherals.
Yuck.
Don't
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
bige...@linutronix.de wrote:
* Pratyush Anand | 2011-08-30 17:27:50 [+0530]:
diff --git a/drivers/usb/dwc/apmppc.c b/drivers/usb/dwc/apmppc.c
new file mode 100644
index 000..80ea274
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/usb/dwc/apmppc.c
@@
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
bige...@linutronix.de wrote:
* Pratyush Anand | 2011-08-30 17:27:55 [+0530]:
diff --git a/drivers/usb/dwc/pcd.c b/drivers/usb/dwc/pcd.c
new file mode 100644
index 000..2ef6405
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/usb/dwc/pcd.c
+static const
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 4:05 AM, Greg KH g...@kroah.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 05:27:48PM +0530, Pratyush Anand wrote:
From: Tirumala Marri tma...@apm.com
Add Synopsys Design Ware core register definitions.
Signed-off-by: Tirumala R Marri tma...@apm.com
Signed-off-by: Fushen Chen
On 09/02/2011 01:17 PM, Pratyush Anand wrote:
oh boy, oh boy. This is a huge number of module parameters. Do you
actually expect someone setting all of them on modprobe? And if udev is
faster you rmmod and modpobe again, right? The clever ones would enter
it somewhere in modprobe.conf or so.
I will send you those patches.
But, how to go about it? Will you send next revision of your patces soon, and
will also include comments for current review?
Or,
I replly all the comments from community and get agreed about
modifications first.
Then I will release next revision with all these
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 4:06 AM, Greg KH g...@kroah.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 05:27:49PM +0530, Pratyush Anand wrote:
There are some DWC OTG parameters which might be passed by a platform.
Declaration for structure of those parameters have been provided in this
include file.
On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
bige...@linutronix.de wrote:
On 09/02/2011 01:17 PM, Pratyush Anand wrote:
oh boy, oh boy. This is a huge number of module parameters. Do you
actually expect someone setting all of them on modprobe? And if udev is
faster you rmmod and
В Fri, 2 Sep 2011 17:12:17 +0530
Pratyush Anand pratyush.an...@gmail.com пишет:
I will send you those patches.
But, how to go about it? Will you send next revision of your patces soon, and
will also include comments for current review?
Or,
I replly all the comments from community and get
There can be some peripheral like dwc-otg, whose registers will be
either in LE or in BE
depending on the RTL configuration selected by a implementor.
Software always expects a LE value when it will call in_ and will
provide a LE value when out_.
It expects beacuse , it wants to do same bit
From: Stephen George stephen.geo...@freescale.com
Adding new device tree binding file for the DCSR node. Modifying device
tree dtsi files to add DCSR node for P2041, P3041, P3060, P4080, P5020.
Signed-off-by: Stephen George stephen.geo...@freescale.com
Signed-off-by: Kumar Gala
I will send you those patches.
But, how to go about it? Will you send next revision of your patces
soon, and
will also include comments for current review?
Or,
I replly all the comments from community and get agreed about
modifications first.
Then I will release next revision with all these
Pratyush Anand pratyush.an...@gmail.com пишет:
I will send you those patches.
But, how to go about it? Will you send next revision of your patces
soon, and will also include comments for current review?
Or,
I replly all the comments from community and get agreed about
modifications first.
On 09/01/2011 10:21 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:
On Sep 1, 2011, at 3:42 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
On 09/01/2011 02:26 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:
The P4080 silicon device tree was using PowerPC,4080 while the other
e500mc based SoCs used PowerPC,e500mc. Use the core name to be
consistent going forward.
On Sep 2, 2011, at 12:52 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
On 09/01/2011 10:21 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:
On Sep 1, 2011, at 3:42 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
On 09/01/2011 02:26 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:
The P4080 silicon device tree was using PowerPC,4080 while the other
e500mc based SoCs used PowerPC,e500mc.
On 09/02/2011 01:29 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:
On Sep 2, 2011, at 12:52 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
On 09/01/2011 10:21 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:
On Sep 1, 2011, at 3:42 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
Is the PowerPC vendor string still appropriate here, or should we use
fsl?
I have mixed feelings on this.
On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 05:19:17PM +0530, Pratyush Anand wrote:
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 4:06 AM, Greg KH g...@kroah.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 05:27:49PM +0530, Pratyush Anand wrote:
There are some DWC OTG parameters which might be passed by a platform.
Declaration for structure of
21 matches
Mail list logo
