Hi
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 6:57 PM, Axel Lin wrote:
> 2013/7/1 Vipin Kumar :
>> On 7/1/2013 11:02 AM, Axel Lin wrote:
The questions raised here are valid and it forced me to re-read the
datasheet. For your convenience, I must tell you that the device is
actually
pl06
2013/7/1 Vipin Kumar :
> On 7/1/2013 11:02 AM, Axel Lin wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> The questions raised here are valid and it forced me to re-read the
>>> datasheet. For your convenience, I must tell you that the device is
>>> actually
>>> pl061 from ARM, so the driver can also be named so.
>>>
>>> The dat
On 7/1/2013 11:02 AM, Axel Lin wrote:
The questions raised here are valid and it forced me to re-read the
datasheet. For your convenience, I must tell you that the device is actually
pl061 from ARM, so the driver can also be named so.
The datasheet is here
http://infocenter.arm.com/help/index.j
>
> The questions raised here are valid and it forced me to re-read the
> datasheet. For your convenience, I must tell you that the device is actually
> pl061 from ARM, so the driver can also be named so.
>
> The datasheet is here
> http://infocenter.arm.com/help/index.jsp?topic=/com.arm.doc.ddi019
On 6/30/2013 2:27 PM, Axel Lin wrote:
2013/6/30 Michael Trimarchi:
Hi
Il giorno 30/giu/2013 06:18, "Axel Lin" ha scritto:
2013/6/21 Michael Trimarchi:
On 06/21/2013 06:40 AM, Vipin Kumar wrote:
On 6/20/2013 7:26 PM, Axel Lin wrote:
2013/6/20 Marek Vasut
Dear Axel Lin,
In current gpio
2013/6/30 Michael Trimarchi :
> Hi
> Il giorno 30/giu/2013 06:18, "Axel Lin" ha scritto:
>
>
>>
>> 2013/6/21 Michael Trimarchi :
>> > On 06/21/2013 06:40 AM, Vipin Kumar wrote:
>> >> On 6/20/2013 7:26 PM, Axel Lin wrote:
>> >>> 2013/6/20 Marek Vasut
>>
>> Dear Axel Lin,
>>
>> >
Hi
Il giorno 30/giu/2013 06:18, "Axel Lin" ha scritto:
>
> 2013/6/21 Michael Trimarchi :
> > On 06/21/2013 06:40 AM, Vipin Kumar wrote:
> >> On 6/20/2013 7:26 PM, Axel Lin wrote:
> >>> 2013/6/20 Marek Vasut
>
> Dear Axel Lin,
>
> > In current gpio_set_value() implementation, it
2013/6/21 Michael Trimarchi :
> On 06/21/2013 06:40 AM, Vipin Kumar wrote:
>> On 6/20/2013 7:26 PM, Axel Lin wrote:
>>> 2013/6/20 Marek Vasut
Dear Axel Lin,
> In current gpio_set_value() implementation, it always sets the gpio
> control
> bit no matter the value argument
On 06/21/2013 06:40 AM, Vipin Kumar wrote:
> On 6/20/2013 7:26 PM, Axel Lin wrote:
>> 2013/6/20 Marek Vasut
>>>
>>> Dear Axel Lin,
>>>
In current gpio_set_value() implementation, it always sets the gpio control
bit no matter the value argument is 0 or 1. Thus the GPIOs never set to
l
On 6/20/2013 7:26 PM, Axel Lin wrote:
2013/6/20 Marek Vasut
Dear Axel Lin,
In current gpio_set_value() implementation, it always sets the gpio control
bit no matter the value argument is 0 or 1. Thus the GPIOs never set to
low. This patch fixes this bug.
Signed-off-by: Axel Lin
---
drivers
Dear Michael Trimarchi,
> Hi
>
> On 06/20/2013 03:56 PM, Axel Lin wrote:
> > 2013/6/20 Marek Vasut
> >
> >> Dear Axel Lin,
> >>
> >>> In current gpio_set_value() implementation, it always sets the gpio
> >>> control bit no matter the value argument is 0 or 1. Thus the GPIOs
> >>> never set to
Hi
On 06/20/2013 03:56 PM, Axel Lin wrote:
> 2013/6/20 Marek Vasut
>>
>> Dear Axel Lin,
>>
>>> In current gpio_set_value() implementation, it always sets the gpio control
>>> bit no matter the value argument is 0 or 1. Thus the GPIOs never set to
>>> low. This patch fixes this bug.
>>>
>>> Signed
Dear Michael Trimarchi,
> Hi
>
> Il giorno 20/giu/2013 15:57, "Marek Vasut" ha scritto:
> > Dear Michael Trimarchi,
> >
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > Il giorno 20/giu/2013 09:14, "Axel Lin" ha
>
> scritto:
> > > > In current gpio_set_value() implementation, it always sets the gpio
> > >
> > > contro
Hi
Il giorno 20/giu/2013 15:57, "Marek Vasut" ha scritto:
>
> Dear Michael Trimarchi,
>
> > Hi
> >
> > Il giorno 20/giu/2013 09:14, "Axel Lin" ha
scritto:
> > > In current gpio_set_value() implementation, it always sets the gpio
> >
> > control bit
> >
> > > no matter the value argument is 0 or 1
2013/6/20 Marek Vasut
>
> Dear Axel Lin,
>
> > In current gpio_set_value() implementation, it always sets the gpio control
> > bit no matter the value argument is 0 or 1. Thus the GPIOs never set to
> > low. This patch fixes this bug.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Axel Lin
> > ---
> > drivers/gpio/spea
Dear Michael Trimarchi,
> Hi
>
> Il giorno 20/giu/2013 09:14, "Axel Lin" ha scritto:
> > In current gpio_set_value() implementation, it always sets the gpio
>
> control bit
>
> > no matter the value argument is 0 or 1. Thus the GPIOs never set to low.
> > This patch fixes this bug.
> >
> > Si
Dear Axel Lin,
> In current gpio_set_value() implementation, it always sets the gpio control
> bit no matter the value argument is 0 or 1. Thus the GPIOs never set to
> low. This patch fixes this bug.
>
> Signed-off-by: Axel Lin
> ---
> drivers/gpio/spear_gpio.c | 5 -
> 1 file changed, 4 i
Hi
Il giorno 20/giu/2013 09:14, "Axel Lin" ha scritto:
>
> In current gpio_set_value() implementation, it always sets the gpio
control bit
> no matter the value argument is 0 or 1. Thus the GPIOs never set to low.
> This patch fixes this bug.
>
> Signed-off-by: Axel Lin
> ---
> drivers/gpio/spea
On 20.06.2013 09:13, Axel Lin wrote:
> In current gpio_set_value() implementation, it always sets the gpio control
> bit
> no matter the value argument is 0 or 1. Thus the GPIOs never set to low.
> This patch fixes this bug.
>
> Signed-off-by: Axel Lin
Acked-by: Stefan Roese
Thanks,
Stefan
_
19 matches
Mail list logo
