From: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com>
To: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, wg@grandegger.com,
linux-can@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, vksavl@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] can: add Renesas R-Car CAN driver
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2014 04:34:06 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52E3148E.2010608@cogentembedded.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52DCE9E4.7010209@pengutronix.de>
Hello.
On 01/20/2014 12:18 PM, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
>> Add support for the CAN controller found in Renesas R-Car SoCs.
>> Signed-off-by: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com>
>> ---
>> The patch is against the 'linux-can-next.git' repo.
[...]
>> Index: linux-can-next/drivers/net/can/rcar_can.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ linux-can-next/drivers/net/can/rcar_can.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,857 @@
[...]
>> +/* Mailbox registers structure */
>> +struct rcar_can_mbox_regs {
>> + u32 id; /* IDE and RTR bits, SID and EID */
>> + u8 stub; /* Not used */
>> + u8 dlc; /* Data Length Code - bits [0..3] */
>> + u8 data[8]; /* Data Bytes */
>> + u8 tsh; /* Time Stamp Higher Byte */
>> + u8 tsl; /* Time Stamp Lower Byte */
>> +} __packed;
> If you have contact to the hardware designer please blame him for
Unfortunately, we don't.
> placing the data register unaligned into the register space. :)
It's not even the only one or worst example of questionable register
design in this module IMO.
[...]
>> +static void rcar_can_tx_done(struct net_device *ndev)
>> +{
>> + struct rcar_can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(ndev);
>> + struct net_device_stats *stats = &ndev->stats;
>> + int i;
>> +
>> + spin_lock(&priv->skb_lock);
>> + for (i = 0; i < priv->frames_queued; i++)
>> + can_get_echo_skb(ndev, i);
>> + stats->tx_bytes += priv->bytes_queued;
>> + stats->tx_packets += priv->frames_queued;
>> + priv->bytes_queued = 0;
>> + priv->frames_queued = 0;
>> + spin_unlock(&priv->skb_lock);
> This looks broken. What happens if you send 2 CAN frames in a row, the
> first one is send, a TX complete interrupt is issued and you handle it
> here? You assume, that all CAN frames have been sent.
TX interrupt will be issued only when TX FIFO gets empty (all 2 frames
have been transmitted in this case). Please see the comment to the
RCAR_CAN_MIER1_TXFIT bit.
>> +static irqreturn_t rcar_can_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
>> +{
>> + struct net_device *ndev = (struct net_device *)dev_id;
> the cast is not needed
Removed.
[...]
>> +static void rcar_can_set_bittiming(struct net_device *dev)
>> +{
>> + struct rcar_can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
>> + struct can_bittiming *bt = &priv->can.bittiming;
>> + u32 bcr;
>> + u8 clkr;
>> +
>> + /* Don't overwrite CLKR with 32-bit BCR access */
>> + /* CLKR has 8-bit access */
> Can you explain the register layout here? Why do you access BCR with 32
> bits when the register is defined as 3x8 bit? Can't you make it a
> standard 32 bit register?
1. According to documentation BCR is the 24-bit register.
Actually we can consider some 32-bit register that combines BCR and
CLKR but according to documentation there are two separate registers.
2. BCR has 8- ,16-, and 32-bit access (according to documentation).
3. This is the algorithm that the documentation suggests.
4. We had a driver version with byte access but 32-bit access seems shorter.
>> +static void rcar_can_start(struct net_device *ndev)
>> +{
>> + struct rcar_can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(ndev);
>> + u16 ctlr, str;
>> +
>> + /* Set controller to known mode:
>> + * - FIFO mailbox mode
>> + * - accept all messages
>> + * - overrun mode
>> + * CAN is in sleep mode after MCU hardware or software reset.
>> + */
>> + ctlr = readw(&priv->regs->ctlr);
>> + ctlr &= ~RCAR_CAN_CTLR_SLPM;
>> + writew(ctlr, &priv->regs->ctlr);
>> + /* Go to reset mode */
>> + ctlr |= RCAR_CAN_CTLR_CANM_FORCE_RESET;
>> + writew(ctlr, &priv->regs->ctlr);
>> + do {
>> + str = readw(&priv->regs->str);
>> + } while (!(str & RCAR_CAN_STR_RSTST));
> Please add a timeout for this loop and the loop below.
Added a counter, converted the loop to *for*.
>> +static int rcar_can_open(struct net_device *ndev)
>> +{
>> + struct rcar_can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(ndev);
>> + int err;
>> +
>> + clk_prepare_enable(priv->clk);
> clk_prepare_enable can fail
Added check.
>> + err = open_candev(ndev);
>> + if (err) {
>> + netdev_err(ndev, "open_candev() failed %d\n", err);
>> + goto out;
> please adjust the jump label, you have to disable the clock.
Fixed.
[...]
>> +static void rcar_can_stop(struct net_device *ndev)
>> +{
>> + struct rcar_can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(ndev);
>> + u16 ctlr, str;
>> +
>> + /* Go to (force) reset mode */
>> + ctlr = readw(&priv->regs->ctlr);
>> + ctlr |= RCAR_CAN_CTLR_CANM_FORCE_RESET;
>> + writew(ctlr, &priv->regs->ctlr);
>> + do {
>> + str = readw(&priv->regs->str);
>> + } while (!(str & RCAR_CAN_STR_RSTST));
> please add a timeout to the loop
Added a counter and converted to *for*.
[...]
>> +static netdev_tx_t rcar_can_start_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb,
>> + struct net_device *ndev)
>> +{
>> + struct rcar_can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(ndev);
>> + struct can_frame *cf = (struct can_frame *)skb->data;
>> + u32 data, i;
>> + unsigned long flags;
>> + u8 tfcr;
>> +
>> + if (can_dropped_invalid_skb(ndev, skb))
>> + return NETDEV_TX_OK;
>> + tfcr = readb(&priv->regs->tfcr);
>> + if ((tfcr & RCAR_CAN_TFCR_TFUST) >> RCAR_CAN_TFCR_TFUST_SHIFT > 2)
>> + netif_stop_queue(ndev);
> Can you explain what's checked here?
if (<Number of unsent massages in Transmit FIFO> > 2)
FIFO depth = 4.
Added a comment. Changed to >= 3.
>> +
>> + if (cf->can_id & CAN_EFF_FLAG) {
>> + /* Extended frame format */
>> + data = (cf->can_id & CAN_EFF_MASK) | RCAR_CAN_IDE;
>> + } else {
>> + /* Standard frame format */
>> + data = (cf->can_id & CAN_SFF_MASK) << RCAR_CAN_SID_SHIFT;
>> + }
>> + if (cf->can_id & CAN_RTR_FLAG) {
>> + /* Remote transmission request */
>> + data |= RCAR_CAN_RTR;
>> + }
> You can move the comments into the line of if and else and remove the {
> & } as there is only one line after if and else.
Done.
>> + writel(data, &priv->regs->mb[RCAR_CAN_TX_FIFO_MBX].id);
>> +
>> + writeb(cf->can_dlc, &priv->regs->mb[RCAR_CAN_TX_FIFO_MBX].dlc);
>> +
>> + for (i = 0; i < cf->can_dlc; i++)
>> + writeb(cf->data[i],
>> + &priv->regs->mb[RCAR_CAN_TX_FIFO_MBX].data[i]);
>> +
>> + spin_lock_irqsave(&priv->skb_lock, flags);
>> + can_put_echo_skb(skb, ndev, priv->frames_queued++);
>> + priv->bytes_queued += cf->can_dlc;
> How does the frames_queued and bytes_queued mechanism work?
Explained above, we get TX interrupt only after all queued packets are sent.
>> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&priv->skb_lock, flags);
>> + /* Start Tx: write 0xFF to the TFPCR register to increment
>> + * the CPU-side pointer for the transmit FIFO to the next
>> + * mailbox location
>> + */
>> + writeb(0xFF, &priv->regs->tfpcr);
> please use lowercase for hex.
Done here ind in comment above.
>> +
>> + return NETDEV_TX_OK;
> I'm missing flow control here. You have to stop the queue if there isn't
> any room in the tx fifo.
You've seen it above.
[...]
>> +static int rcar_can_rx_poll(struct napi_struct *napi, int quota)
>> +{
>> + struct rcar_can_priv *priv = container_of(napi,
>> + struct rcar_can_priv, napi);
>> + int num_pkts = 0;
>> +
>> + while (num_pkts < quota) {
>> + u8 i, rfcr, nframes, isr;
>> +
>> + isr = readb(&priv->regs->isr);
>> + /* Clear interrupt bit */
>> + if (isr & RCAR_CAN_ISR_RXFF)
>> + writeb(isr & ~RCAR_CAN_ISR_RXFF, &priv->regs->isr);
>> + rfcr = readb(&priv->regs->rfcr);
>> + if (rfcr & RCAR_CAN_RFCR_RFEST)
>> + break;
>> + nframes = (rfcr & RCAR_CAN_RFCR_RFUST) >>
>> + RCAR_CAN_RFCR_RFUST_SHIFT;
>> + for (i = 0; i < nframes; i++) {
>> + rcar_can_rx_pkt(priv);
>> + /* Write 0xFF to the RFPCR register to increment
>> + * the CPU-side pointer for the receive FIFO
>> + * to the next mailbox location
>> + */
>> + writeb(0xFF, &priv->regs->rfpcr);
>> + ++num_pkts;
>> + }
> The for loop inside the while loop makes no sense if you increment
> num_pkts. You are not allowed to receive more than quota CAN frames.
Removed the *for* loop. Stupid me. :-)
>> +static int rcar_can_get_berr_counter(const struct net_device *dev,
>> + struct can_berr_counter *bec)
>> +{
>> + struct rcar_can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
>> +
>> + clk_prepare_enable(priv->clk);
> clk_prepare_enable can fail
Fixed.
[...]
>> +static int rcar_can_resume(struct device *dev)
>> +{
>> + struct net_device *ndev = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>> + struct rcar_can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(ndev);
>> + u16 ctlr;
>> +
>> + clk_enable(priv->clk);
Added error check.
[...]
>> Index: linux-can-next/include/linux/can/platform/rcar_can.h
>> ===================================================================
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ linux-can-next/include/linux/can/platform/rcar_can.h
>> @@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
>> +#ifndef _CAN_PLATFORM_RCAR_CAN_H_
>> +#define _CAN_PLATFORM_RCAR_CAN_H_
>> +
>> +#include <linux/types.h>
>> +
>> +/* Clock Select Register settings */
>> +#define CLKR_CLKEXT 3 /* Externally input clock */
>> +#define CLKR_CLKP2 1 /* Peripheral clock (clkp2) */
>> +#define CLKR_CLKP1 0 /* Peripheral clock (clkp1) */
> Please make it an enum
Done.
WBR, Sergei
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com>
To: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, wg@grandegger.com,
linux-can@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, vksavl@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] can: add Renesas R-Car CAN driver
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2014 00:34:09 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52E3148E.2010608@cogentembedded.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52DCE9E4.7010209@pengutronix.de>
Hello.
On 01/20/2014 12:18 PM, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
>> Add support for the CAN controller found in Renesas R-Car SoCs.
>> Signed-off-by: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com>
>> ---
>> The patch is against the 'linux-can-next.git' repo.
[...]
>> Index: linux-can-next/drivers/net/can/rcar_can.c
>> =================================>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ linux-can-next/drivers/net/can/rcar_can.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,857 @@
[...]
>> +/* Mailbox registers structure */
>> +struct rcar_can_mbox_regs {
>> + u32 id; /* IDE and RTR bits, SID and EID */
>> + u8 stub; /* Not used */
>> + u8 dlc; /* Data Length Code - bits [0..3] */
>> + u8 data[8]; /* Data Bytes */
>> + u8 tsh; /* Time Stamp Higher Byte */
>> + u8 tsl; /* Time Stamp Lower Byte */
>> +} __packed;
> If you have contact to the hardware designer please blame him for
Unfortunately, we don't.
> placing the data register unaligned into the register space. :)
It's not even the only one or worst example of questionable register
design in this module IMO.
[...]
>> +static void rcar_can_tx_done(struct net_device *ndev)
>> +{
>> + struct rcar_can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(ndev);
>> + struct net_device_stats *stats = &ndev->stats;
>> + int i;
>> +
>> + spin_lock(&priv->skb_lock);
>> + for (i = 0; i < priv->frames_queued; i++)
>> + can_get_echo_skb(ndev, i);
>> + stats->tx_bytes += priv->bytes_queued;
>> + stats->tx_packets += priv->frames_queued;
>> + priv->bytes_queued = 0;
>> + priv->frames_queued = 0;
>> + spin_unlock(&priv->skb_lock);
> This looks broken. What happens if you send 2 CAN frames in a row, the
> first one is send, a TX complete interrupt is issued and you handle it
> here? You assume, that all CAN frames have been sent.
TX interrupt will be issued only when TX FIFO gets empty (all 2 frames
have been transmitted in this case). Please see the comment to the
RCAR_CAN_MIER1_TXFIT bit.
>> +static irqreturn_t rcar_can_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
>> +{
>> + struct net_device *ndev = (struct net_device *)dev_id;
> the cast is not needed
Removed.
[...]
>> +static void rcar_can_set_bittiming(struct net_device *dev)
>> +{
>> + struct rcar_can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
>> + struct can_bittiming *bt = &priv->can.bittiming;
>> + u32 bcr;
>> + u8 clkr;
>> +
>> + /* Don't overwrite CLKR with 32-bit BCR access */
>> + /* CLKR has 8-bit access */
> Can you explain the register layout here? Why do you access BCR with 32
> bits when the register is defined as 3x8 bit? Can't you make it a
> standard 32 bit register?
1. According to documentation BCR is the 24-bit register.
Actually we can consider some 32-bit register that combines BCR and
CLKR but according to documentation there are two separate registers.
2. BCR has 8- ,16-, and 32-bit access (according to documentation).
3. This is the algorithm that the documentation suggests.
4. We had a driver version with byte access but 32-bit access seems shorter.
>> +static void rcar_can_start(struct net_device *ndev)
>> +{
>> + struct rcar_can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(ndev);
>> + u16 ctlr, str;
>> +
>> + /* Set controller to known mode:
>> + * - FIFO mailbox mode
>> + * - accept all messages
>> + * - overrun mode
>> + * CAN is in sleep mode after MCU hardware or software reset.
>> + */
>> + ctlr = readw(&priv->regs->ctlr);
>> + ctlr &= ~RCAR_CAN_CTLR_SLPM;
>> + writew(ctlr, &priv->regs->ctlr);
>> + /* Go to reset mode */
>> + ctlr |= RCAR_CAN_CTLR_CANM_FORCE_RESET;
>> + writew(ctlr, &priv->regs->ctlr);
>> + do {
>> + str = readw(&priv->regs->str);
>> + } while (!(str & RCAR_CAN_STR_RSTST));
> Please add a timeout for this loop and the loop below.
Added a counter, converted the loop to *for*.
>> +static int rcar_can_open(struct net_device *ndev)
>> +{
>> + struct rcar_can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(ndev);
>> + int err;
>> +
>> + clk_prepare_enable(priv->clk);
> clk_prepare_enable can fail
Added check.
>> + err = open_candev(ndev);
>> + if (err) {
>> + netdev_err(ndev, "open_candev() failed %d\n", err);
>> + goto out;
> please adjust the jump label, you have to disable the clock.
Fixed.
[...]
>> +static void rcar_can_stop(struct net_device *ndev)
>> +{
>> + struct rcar_can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(ndev);
>> + u16 ctlr, str;
>> +
>> + /* Go to (force) reset mode */
>> + ctlr = readw(&priv->regs->ctlr);
>> + ctlr |= RCAR_CAN_CTLR_CANM_FORCE_RESET;
>> + writew(ctlr, &priv->regs->ctlr);
>> + do {
>> + str = readw(&priv->regs->str);
>> + } while (!(str & RCAR_CAN_STR_RSTST));
> please add a timeout to the loop
Added a counter and converted to *for*.
[...]
>> +static netdev_tx_t rcar_can_start_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb,
>> + struct net_device *ndev)
>> +{
>> + struct rcar_can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(ndev);
>> + struct can_frame *cf = (struct can_frame *)skb->data;
>> + u32 data, i;
>> + unsigned long flags;
>> + u8 tfcr;
>> +
>> + if (can_dropped_invalid_skb(ndev, skb))
>> + return NETDEV_TX_OK;
>> + tfcr = readb(&priv->regs->tfcr);
>> + if ((tfcr & RCAR_CAN_TFCR_TFUST) >> RCAR_CAN_TFCR_TFUST_SHIFT > 2)
>> + netif_stop_queue(ndev);
> Can you explain what's checked here?
if (<Number of unsent massages in Transmit FIFO> > 2)
FIFO depth = 4.
Added a comment. Changed to >= 3.
>> +
>> + if (cf->can_id & CAN_EFF_FLAG) {
>> + /* Extended frame format */
>> + data = (cf->can_id & CAN_EFF_MASK) | RCAR_CAN_IDE;
>> + } else {
>> + /* Standard frame format */
>> + data = (cf->can_id & CAN_SFF_MASK) << RCAR_CAN_SID_SHIFT;
>> + }
>> + if (cf->can_id & CAN_RTR_FLAG) {
>> + /* Remote transmission request */
>> + data |= RCAR_CAN_RTR;
>> + }
> You can move the comments into the line of if and else and remove the {
> & } as there is only one line after if and else.
Done.
>> + writel(data, &priv->regs->mb[RCAR_CAN_TX_FIFO_MBX].id);
>> +
>> + writeb(cf->can_dlc, &priv->regs->mb[RCAR_CAN_TX_FIFO_MBX].dlc);
>> +
>> + for (i = 0; i < cf->can_dlc; i++)
>> + writeb(cf->data[i],
>> + &priv->regs->mb[RCAR_CAN_TX_FIFO_MBX].data[i]);
>> +
>> + spin_lock_irqsave(&priv->skb_lock, flags);
>> + can_put_echo_skb(skb, ndev, priv->frames_queued++);
>> + priv->bytes_queued += cf->can_dlc;
> How does the frames_queued and bytes_queued mechanism work?
Explained above, we get TX interrupt only after all queued packets are sent.
>> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&priv->skb_lock, flags);
>> + /* Start Tx: write 0xFF to the TFPCR register to increment
>> + * the CPU-side pointer for the transmit FIFO to the next
>> + * mailbox location
>> + */
>> + writeb(0xFF, &priv->regs->tfpcr);
> please use lowercase for hex.
Done here ind in comment above.
>> +
>> + return NETDEV_TX_OK;
> I'm missing flow control here. You have to stop the queue if there isn't
> any room in the tx fifo.
You've seen it above.
[...]
>> +static int rcar_can_rx_poll(struct napi_struct *napi, int quota)
>> +{
>> + struct rcar_can_priv *priv = container_of(napi,
>> + struct rcar_can_priv, napi);
>> + int num_pkts = 0;
>> +
>> + while (num_pkts < quota) {
>> + u8 i, rfcr, nframes, isr;
>> +
>> + isr = readb(&priv->regs->isr);
>> + /* Clear interrupt bit */
>> + if (isr & RCAR_CAN_ISR_RXFF)
>> + writeb(isr & ~RCAR_CAN_ISR_RXFF, &priv->regs->isr);
>> + rfcr = readb(&priv->regs->rfcr);
>> + if (rfcr & RCAR_CAN_RFCR_RFEST)
>> + break;
>> + nframes = (rfcr & RCAR_CAN_RFCR_RFUST) >>
>> + RCAR_CAN_RFCR_RFUST_SHIFT;
>> + for (i = 0; i < nframes; i++) {
>> + rcar_can_rx_pkt(priv);
>> + /* Write 0xFF to the RFPCR register to increment
>> + * the CPU-side pointer for the receive FIFO
>> + * to the next mailbox location
>> + */
>> + writeb(0xFF, &priv->regs->rfpcr);
>> + ++num_pkts;
>> + }
> The for loop inside the while loop makes no sense if you increment
> num_pkts. You are not allowed to receive more than quota CAN frames.
Removed the *for* loop. Stupid me. :-)
>> +static int rcar_can_get_berr_counter(const struct net_device *dev,
>> + struct can_berr_counter *bec)
>> +{
>> + struct rcar_can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
>> +
>> + clk_prepare_enable(priv->clk);
> clk_prepare_enable can fail
Fixed.
[...]
>> +static int rcar_can_resume(struct device *dev)
>> +{
>> + struct net_device *ndev = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>> + struct rcar_can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(ndev);
>> + u16 ctlr;
>> +
>> + clk_enable(priv->clk);
Added error check.
[...]
>> Index: linux-can-next/include/linux/can/platform/rcar_can.h
>> =================================>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ linux-can-next/include/linux/can/platform/rcar_can.h
>> @@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
>> +#ifndef _CAN_PLATFORM_RCAR_CAN_H_
>> +#define _CAN_PLATFORM_RCAR_CAN_H_
>> +
>> +#include <linux/types.h>
>> +
>> +/* Clock Select Register settings */
>> +#define CLKR_CLKEXT 3 /* Externally input clock */
>> +#define CLKR_CLKP2 1 /* Peripheral clock (clkp2) */
>> +#define CLKR_CLKP1 0 /* Peripheral clock (clkp1) */
> Please make it an enum
Done.
WBR, Sergei
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-25 1:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 66+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-26 20:37 [PATCH v5] can: add Renesas R-Car CAN driver Sergei Shtylyov
2013-12-26 21:37 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2014-01-13 13:46 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2014-01-13 13:46 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2014-01-20 9:18 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-01-20 9:18 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-01-25 0:34 ` Sergei Shtylyov [this message]
2014-01-25 1:34 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2014-02-13 12:12 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-02-13 12:12 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-02-20 22:48 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2014-02-20 23:48 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2014-02-28 9:08 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-02-28 9:08 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-02-28 11:16 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2014-02-28 11:16 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2014-02-28 11:37 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-02-28 11:37 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-02-28 11:41 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-02-28 11:41 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-02-28 11:47 ` David Laight
2014-02-28 11:47 ` David Laight
2014-02-28 11:50 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-02-28 11:50 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-02-28 12:02 ` David Laight
2014-02-28 12:02 ` David Laight
2014-02-28 11:49 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-02-28 11:49 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-02-28 12:05 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2014-02-28 12:05 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2014-02-28 12:17 ` David Laight
2014-02-28 12:17 ` David Laight
2014-02-28 12:34 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2014-02-28 12:34 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2014-01-20 11:43 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-01-20 11:43 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-01-20 11:47 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-01-20 11:47 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-01-20 11:52 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-01-20 11:52 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-01-20 11:58 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-01-20 11:58 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-01-20 12:02 ` Ben Dooks
2014-01-20 12:05 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-01-20 12:05 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-01-20 12:08 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-01-20 12:08 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-01-20 12:05 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-01-20 12:05 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-01-20 12:13 ` David Laight
2014-01-20 12:13 ` David Laight
2014-01-20 12:35 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-01-20 12:35 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-01-20 19:16 ` David Miller
2014-01-20 19:16 ` David Miller
2014-01-20 21:12 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2014-01-20 22:12 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2014-01-20 21:17 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-01-20 21:17 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-01-22 11:52 ` Ben Dooks
2014-01-22 11:54 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-01-22 11:54 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-01-22 11:58 ` David Laight
2014-01-22 11:58 ` David Laight
2014-01-20 12:12 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2014-01-20 12:12 ` Sergei Shtylyov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=52E3148E.2010608@cogentembedded.com \
--to=sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com \
--cc=linux-can@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mkl@pengutronix.de \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vksavl@gmail.com \
--cc=wg@grandegger.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.