Re: irq_intc2.c who uses it?

On Fri, 2004-05-28 at 18:11, David MCKAY wrote:
> On Thursday 27 May 2004 20:03, Paul Mundt wrote:
> > On Thu, May 27, 2004 at 07:04:14PM +0100, David MCKAY wrote:

> > Other then that, these changes look good. It's nice to see ST40 support
> > more or less come back from the dead.
> 
> It is alive and well in the tree we maintain locally. The problem is that it 
> is difficult to find the time to track changes and push changes back into the 
> CVS tree. We will try to keep our 2.6 tree more in line.

Well If the PCI changes get my board up and running on 2.6 I'll get them
checked into pronto. Most of the ST40 stuff is pretty clearly defined
and separated so can be checked in without worrying too much about
breaking everyone else.

Do you make your 2.6 tree available anywhere? If you do it means I can
always check your tree of there is something not working right and
extract the changes and get them checked into the linuxsh cvs if they
work on my setup. Saves me redoing (or screwing up) any work that is
already underway.

By the way did you see the changes to time.c, did they work for you? I'm
sure the logic hasn't changed and it did give the right numbers on my
board.

-- 
Alex, homepage: http://www.bennee.com/~alex/
Drive defensively.  Buy a tank.



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g
Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. 
Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click