[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq: fix use of IRQF_DISABLED in lantiq kmods

The IRQF_DISABLED flag was removed in kernel 4.1 with commit "genirq: Remove the deprecated 'IRQF_DISABLED' request_irq() flag entirely" [1]. Therefore the compilation of ltq-hcd and ltq-vmmc kmods fails. [1]

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq: fix use of IRQF_DISABLED in lantiq kmods

Am 11.10.2015 um 10:50 schrieb Arjen de Korte: Citeren Mathias Kresin : diff --git a/package/kernel/lantiq/ltq-hcd/src/ifxhcd.c b/package/kernel/lantiq/ltq-hcd/src/ifxhcd.c index be0a91d..14dc7a1 100644 --- a/package/kernel/lantiq/ltq-hcd/src/ifxhcd.c +++

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH 1/2] Add package django-sslserver

Please read our package submission guidelines here https://github.com/openwrt/packages/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md and once your submission complies, create a pull request at: https://github.com/openwrt/packages Cheers, Steven ___ openwrt-devel

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq: fix use of IRQF_DISABLED in lantiq kmods

Citeren Mathias Kresin : The IRQF_DISABLED flag was removed in kernel 4.1 with commit "genirq: Remove the deprecated 'IRQF_DISABLED' request_irq() flag entirely" [1]. Therefore the compilation of ltq-hcd and ltq-vmmc kmods fails. [1]

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 11/10/2015 14:09, Jan Čermák wrote: > Hello, > > thanks for pointing that out, Steven. Yes, this is basically the main reason > why > Bedrich opened this topic. If you need to maintain sustainable OpenWrt fork > (no > flame please, there are some situations - like running "heavyweight"

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] [ar71xx] Send power to USB port on WNR2200

comments inline On 10/10/2015 04:44, Riley Baird wrote: > This patch fixes ticket #15267 by enabling power on the > WNR2200's USB port. At present, the USB port on the WNR2200 > is non-functional due to it not receiving power. > > This patch defines an additional GPIO pin, but none of the >

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

Hello, thanks for pointing that out, Steven. Yes, this is basically the main reason why Bedrich opened this topic. If you need to maintain sustainable OpenWrt fork (no flame please, there are some situations - like running "heavyweight" OpenWrt fork on a device like our Turris - when it's

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

Hello John, On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 2:48 PM, John Crispin wrote: > > On 11/10/2015 14:09, Jan Čermák wrote: > > Hello, > > > > thanks for pointing that out, Steven. Yes, this is basically the main > > reason why > > Bedrich opened this topic. If you need to maintain

[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH v2] lantiq: fix use of IRQF_DISABLED in lantiq kmods

The IRQF_DISABLED flag was removed in kernel 4.1 with commit "genirq: Remove the deprecated 'IRQF_DISABLED' request_irq() flag entirely" [1]. Therefore the compilation of ltq-hcd and ltq-vmmc kmods fails. [1]

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

> On 11 Oct 2015, at 14:48, John Crispin wrote: > > patches will linger in mailing list until someone has time to look at > them. the version control system used is completely irrelevant Which is true enough if the switch just encompasses moving to another VCS. However,

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH][ar71xx] add support for tp-link wr841n v10 image generation

Hi, On 07/10/2015 17:34, Daniel Petre wrote: > This adds support to generate images for tp-link wr841n v10 which is almost > identical with tp-link wr841n v9 but with a faster cpu at 650 Mhz. Tested on > a european version. > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Petre > > ---

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

Just my 2-cents IF it isn't BROKENplease DON'T fix it. On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 1:26 PM, Nemesis wrote: > On 10/10/2015 07:45 PM, nemesis wrote: > > On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 00:41:24 +0300, Roman Yeryomin >

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

Certain things are certainly broken. The body of kernel code that OpenWrt maintains (allows to bitrot) outside the upstream kernel tree is broken. Regarding downstream forks, would using Git also make it easier for people like project turris to push appropriate changes back into OpenWrt proper?

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 11 Oct 2015, at 14:48, John Crispin wrote: patches will linger in mailing list until someone has time to look at them. the version control system used is completely irrelevant Which is true enough if the switch just encompasses moving to another VCS. However, what has not

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 10/10/2015 07:45 PM, nemesis wrote: > On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 00:41:24 +0300, Roman Yeryomin > wrote: >> On 9 October 2015 at 21:22, Jo-Philipp Wich wrote: >>> Hi. >>> Moving to Git seemed to have lots of traction at the summit, and I'll add my

[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] base-files: sysupgrade: respect new profile.d infrastructure

i got a patchwork mail[1] with the short message "patch is superseeded" - but no further comments, so the question is: 1) who closed the patch? 2) why is it 'superseeded', but not fixed? bye, bastian [1] http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/528164/ ___

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH][ar71xx] add support for tp-link wr841n v10 image generation

* John Crispin [11.10.2015 20:40]: > also please prefix your patches with ar71xx: and not [ar71xx] can please somebody change the text in https://dev.openwrt.org/wiki/SubmittingPatches @ "13. The canonical patch format" -> Subject: [PATCH 001/123] [section] summary phrase i

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

> Just my 2-cents > > IF it isn't BROKENplease DON'T fix it. the question here is: how much time coders (maintainers, contributors, and users) would spare if the administration was shifted to a different infrastructure. i cannot grow to like git (i still prefer darcs), but github simply

[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH, v2] ar71xx: Bitmain Antminer S1 & S3 cleanup

Sets the LEDs to boardname:color:led-name Sets the LAN to eth0 Other corrections such as the Machine Name and HWIDs v2 corrects the profile names in the Makefile and changes tabs to spaces in the Makefile 'define Device/' like the other devices. Signed-off-by: L. D. Pinney

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

2015-10-11 14:16 GMT-07:00 Attila Lendvai : >> Just my 2-cents >> >> IF it isn't BROKENplease DON'T fix it. > > > the question here is: how much time coders (maintainers, contributors, > and users) would spare if the administration was shifted to a > different