Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCH\]\s+Drop\s+ISA\s+dependencies\s+from\s+IRDA\s+drivers\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCH\]\s+Drop\s+ISA\s+dependencies\s+from\s+IRDA\s+drivers\s*$/: 30 ]

Total 30 documents matching your query.

1. [PATCH] Drop ISA dependencies from IRDA drivers (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxx (Margit Schubert-While); Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 18:39:21 +0200; http://bugme.osdl.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3077 Some IRDA chipsets currently don't work on x86-64, because they're dependent on CONFIG_ISA and x86-64 doesn't set this. CONFIG_ISA means real ISA slots, and; /archives/netdev/2004-07/msg00402.html (10,504 bytes)
2. Re: [PATCH] Drop ISA dependencies from IRDA drivers (score: 1): Author: ens@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 10:00:24 -0700; I was because those driver were using isa_virt_to_bus. I think we can drop that now, but I don't have the problematic architecture. Well, I guess we will learn soon enough :-( Feel free to send that; /archives/netdev/2004-07/msg00409.html (10,235 bytes)
3. Re: [PATCH] Drop ISA dependencies from IRDA drivers (score: 1): Author: ak@xxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 22:50:01 +0200; I don't think so. I did most of the original CONFIG_ISA annotations and I only added it to real ISA devices. And the LPC devices in southbridges are normally not marked CONFIG_ISA. There is great val; /archives/netdev/2004-07/msg00415.html (10,769 bytes)
4. Re: [PATCH] Drop ISA dependencies from IRDA drivers (score: 1): Author: <bunk@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 17:00:38 -0400; Andi Kleen wrote: On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 12:48:07PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: And with legacy ISA devices still around, I don't see a whole lot of value in differentiating between "I have ISA slots"; /archives/netdev/2004-07/msg00416.html (10,779 bytes)
5. Re: [PATCH] Drop ISA dependencies from IRDA drivers (score: 1): Author: ov <johnpol@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 23:55:52 +0200; They should be already aware that most ISA drivers are just not maintained anymore and very likely broken. I doubt there is any bug hunter or maintainer who is not aware of this fact. There are no x8; /archives/netdev/2004-07/msg00417.html (13,462 bytes)
6. Re: [PATCH] Drop ISA dependencies from IRDA drivers (score: 1): Author: >; Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 15:35:28 -0700; Andy, I never said that, please quote me accurately. I personally don't have strong opinions on whether those drivers should be tagged with CONFIG_ISA or not, but those hardware are definitely mapped; /archives/netdev/2004-07/msg00418.html (11,330 bytes)
7. Re: [PATCH] Drop ISA dependencies from IRDA drivers (score: 1): Author: arzik@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 15:42:35 -0700; irda_setup_dma was (supposedly) fixed in 2.6.8-rc1, and no longer depend on CONFIG_ISA. Those driver are supposed to work on 64 bits. Jean; /archives/netdev/2004-07/msg00419.html (11,594 bytes)
8. Re: [PATCH] Drop ISA dependencies from IRDA drivers (score: 1): Author: @xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 07:45:50 +0200; Hmm, good point. !64BIT is not needed - apparently they are 64bit clean. The reason I want to drop the CONFIG_ISA depency is that they *should* be built on x86-64 too. -Andi; /archives/netdev/2004-07/msg00425.html (10,948 bytes)
9. Re: [PATCH] Drop ISA dependencies from IRDA drivers (score: 1): Author: kash_Gonella <Jayprakash_Gonella@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 08:19:04 +0200 (CEST); I think you are right - however, AFAICS this is not the point in this case. These drivers do DMA to legacy devices (call it ISA, LPC, whatever). The documented way for those devices without struct pc; /archives/netdev/2004-07/msg00429.html (10,580 bytes)
10. Re: [PATCH] Drop ISA dependencies from IRDA drivers (score: 1): Author: a@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 07:36:52 +0200; More likely on LPC interface. And not on a ISA slot. Anyways, if you want them to work on x86-64 you will have to drop that bogus dependency. I have no plans to ever define CONFIG_ISA on x86-64. -And; /archives/netdev/2004-07/msg00430.html (10,710 bytes)
11. Re: [PATCH] Drop ISA dependencies from IRDA drivers (score: 1): Author: pranav@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 08:19:13 +0200; There was at least one user report that at least one driver worked with CONFIG_ISA force defined. The old pci_alloc_coherent supported hwdev == NULL under x86-64. dma_alloc_consistent() should too. I; /archives/netdev/2004-07/msg00431.html (10,768 bytes)
12. Re: [PATCH] Drop ISA dependencies from IRDA drivers (score: 1): Author:; Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 12:48:07 -0400; Andi Kleen wrote: http://bugme.osdl.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3077 Some IRDA chipsets currently don't work on x86-64, because they're dependent on CONFIG_ISA and x86-64 doesn't set this. CONFIG_ISA means r; /archives/netdev/2004-07/msg00432.html (10,096 bytes)
13. Re: [PATCH] Drop ISA dependencies from IRDA drivers (score: 1): Author: @xxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 00:57:59 +0200 (CEST); Ok, so maybe the following is missing in addition to Andi's patch? Martin -- -- linux-2.6.8-rc1/net/irda/irda_device.c Tue Jul 13 00:31:34 2004 +++ v2.6.8-rc1-md/net/irda/irda_device.c Fri Jul 16 00:; /archives/netdev/2004-07/msg00450.html (10,027 bytes)
14. Re: [PATCH] Drop ISA dependencies from IRDA drivers (score: 1): Author: x>; Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 00:32:44 +0200 (CEST); Admittedly I haven't tried either, but I'm pretty sure this patch will break building those drivers because they are calling irda_setup_dma - which is CONFIG_ISA. Maybe this can be dropped but I don'; /archives/netdev/2004-07/msg00454.html (10,139 bytes)
15. Re: [PATCH] Drop ISA dependencies from IRDA drivers (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 08:33:45 +0200 (CEST); Ok, thanks. This sounds like the right solution. I think most/all functions in include/asm-generic/dma-mapping.h are not prepared to accept dev=NULL parameters, so it's a bit more than just dma_alloc; /archives/netdev/2004-07/msg00455.html (9,501 bytes)
16. [PATCH] Drop ISA dependencies from IRDA drivers (score: 1): Author: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 18:39:21 +0200; http://bugme.osdl.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3077 Some IRDA chipsets currently don't work on x86-64, because they're dependent on CONFIG_ISA and x86-64 doesn't set this. CONFIG_ISA means real ISA slots, and; /archives/netdev/2004-07/msg01218.html (10,519 bytes)
17. Re: [PATCH] Drop ISA dependencies from IRDA drivers (score: 1): Author: Jean Tourrilhes <jt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 10:00:24 -0700; I was because those driver were using isa_virt_to_bus. I think we can drop that now, but I don't have the problematic architecture. Well, I guess we will learn soon enough :-( Feel free to send that; /archives/netdev/2004-07/msg01225.html (10,332 bytes)
18. Re: [PATCH] Drop ISA dependencies from IRDA drivers (score: 1): Author: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 22:50:01 +0200; I don't think so. I did most of the original CONFIG_ISA annotations and I only added it to real ISA devices. And the LPC devices in southbridges are normally not marked CONFIG_ISA. There is great val; /archives/netdev/2004-07/msg01231.html (10,854 bytes)
19. Re: [PATCH] Drop ISA dependencies from IRDA drivers (score: 1): Author: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 17:00:38 -0400; Andi Kleen wrote: On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 12:48:07PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: And with legacy ISA devices still around, I don't see a whole lot of value in differentiating between "I have ISA slots"; /archives/netdev/2004-07/msg01232.html (10,955 bytes)
20. Re: [PATCH] Drop ISA dependencies from IRDA drivers (score: 1): Author: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 23:55:52 +0200; They should be already aware that most ISA drivers are just not maintained anymore and very likely broken. I doubt there is any bug hunter or maintainer who is not aware of this fact. There are no x8; /archives/netdev/2004-07/msg01233.html (13,585 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]