Hi Loic/Ohad, On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 2:52 AM, Loic PALLARDY <loic.pallardy@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > On 12/21/2012 08:31 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Olof Johansson<olof@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> While we can make the branch stable, would it make sense to make >>> remoteproc for omap depend on !multiplatform during the transition, to >>> reduce dependencies a little? Either way works, but it'd be nice to >>> keep them independent if we can. >> >> I'm not sure multiplatform is the culprit; OMAP's remoteproc driver >> heavily depends on this mailbox code, and obviously breaks with this >> patch-set if only for the the naming changes. We'll need this patch >> set to update omap's remoteproc as well so at least we don't break >> bisectibility, though running a sanity test before merging would be >> even nicer (Loic I can help if you don't have a panda board). > > Hi Ohad, > Yes tidspbridge and remoteproc must be adapted. > This new mailbox fw has been tested on TI environment by Omar, who did > adaptation at least for tidspbridge. > > Omar, do you have patch series ready for TI adaptations to new mailbox > framework? > Else I can do it, but I won't be able to test it (no panda board) Yes, I made the changes, for tidspbridge and remoteproc, I will submit both for review, based on this series. Cheers, Omar -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
