On 03.05.2016 19:18, Marek Vasut wrote:
On 05/03/2016 07:00 PM, Stefan Roese wrote:
On 03.05.2016 18:53, Marek Vasut wrote:
On 05/02/2016 05:20 PM, Stefan Roese wrote:
On 29.04.2016 12:13, Marek Vasut wrote:
On 28.04.2016 00:36, Marek Vasut wrote:
The indirect write code is buggy pile of
On 05/03/2016 07:00 PM, Stefan Roese wrote:
> On 03.05.2016 18:53, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 05/02/2016 05:20 PM, Stefan Roese wrote:
>>> On 29.04.2016 12:13, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On 28.04.2016 00:36, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> The indirect write code is buggy pile of nastiness which fails
On 03.05.2016 18:53, Marek Vasut wrote:
On 05/02/2016 05:20 PM, Stefan Roese wrote:
On 29.04.2016 12:13, Marek Vasut wrote:
On 28.04.2016 00:36, Marek Vasut wrote:
The indirect write code is buggy pile of nastiness which fails horribly
when the system runs fast enough to saturate the
On 05/02/2016 05:20 PM, Stefan Roese wrote:
> On 29.04.2016 12:13, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>> On 28.04.2016 00:36, Marek Vasut wrote:
The indirect write code is buggy pile of nastiness which fails horribly
when the system runs fast enough to saturate the controller. The failure
results
On 05/03/2016 12:42 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> This patch replaces the whole unmaintainable indirect write implementation
>> with the one from upcoming Linux CQSPI driver, which went through multiple
>> rounds of thorough review and testing. While this makes the patch look
>> terrifying
Hi!
> This patch replaces the whole unmaintainable indirect write implementation
> with the one from upcoming Linux CQSPI driver, which went through multiple
> rounds of thorough review and testing. While this makes the patch look
> terrifying and violates all best-practices of software
On 29.04.2016 12:13, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 28.04.2016 00:36, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>> The indirect write code is buggy pile of nastiness which fails horribly
>>> when the system runs fast enough to saturate the controller. The failure
>>> results in some pages (256B) not being written to the
On 04/29/2016 11:35 AM, Stefan Roese wrote:
> Hi Marek,
>
> On 28.04.2016 00:36, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> The indirect write code is buggy pile of nastiness which fails horribly
>> when the system runs fast enough to saturate the controller. The failure
>> results in some pages (256B) not being
Hi Marek,
On 28.04.2016 00:36, Marek Vasut wrote:
> The indirect write code is buggy pile of nastiness which fails horribly
> when the system runs fast enough to saturate the controller. The failure
> results in some pages (256B) not being written to the flash. This can be
> observed on systems
On 04/28/2016 04:06 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> The indirect write code is buggy pile of nastiness which fails horribly
> when the system runs fast enough to saturate the controller. The failure
> results in some pages (256B) not being written to the flash. This can be
> observed on systems which
The indirect write code is buggy pile of nastiness which fails horribly
when the system runs fast enough to saturate the controller. The failure
results in some pages (256B) not being written to the flash. This can be
observed on systems which run with Dcache enabled and L2 cache enabled,
like the
11 matches
Mail list logo
