On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 14:20, Ralf Baechle<ralf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 11:12:48AM +0900, Atsushi Nemoto wrote:
>> > Relying on pure C for computation of the delay value removes the need for
>> > explicit. The price we pay is a slight slowdown of the computation - to
>> > be fixed on another day.
>>
>> Please fix this commit.
>
> Sigh. I wonder how this wrong version made it into my tree. Oh well,
> applied. No time to fuzz around before 2.6.30 even though I'd like to
> avoid the 64-bit arithmetic.
>
> Applied. Thanks!
I can confirm that after this patch, 2.6.30 builds and boots fine on RBTX4927.
Please submit it for 2.6.30-rc1 and 2.6.30.1 ;-)
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
