Proposal to send GSM sysfs patches on stable
mok at mnet-online.de
Wed Mar 4 09:04:54 CET 2009
* Andy Green <andy at openmoko.com> [090302 15:55]:
> Somebody in the thread at some point said:
> | * Andy Green <andy at openmoko.com> [090302 15:21]:
> |> Somebody in the thread at some point said:
> |> | Dear Andy,
> |> |
> |> | Andy Green wrote (ao):
> |> |> Otherwise, they will simply propose people keep using U-Boot and
> not Qi
> |> |> as their "fix". To the extent we pull some extra current until GSM is
> |> |> turned on, Qi is then compatible with old and new kernels. So it's the
> |> |> best path right now AFAICT.
> |> |
> |> | Would it be too inconvenient to have a 'correct' Qi and a
> |> | 'backwards compatible' Qi?
> |> It's not inconvenient if it can choose what to do at runtime, based on a
> |> sign from the U-Boot header that the kernel it's going to run can cope
> |> with the right thing.
> | what does this mean when booting from SD? No u-boot header involved
> | there, no?
> There is the same U-Boot header on our kernels no matter where you're
> booting it from.
> And it is a fixed-length (64 byte) header.
So... in the end you decided to just revert it?
Klaus 'mrmoku' Kurzmann
More information about the openmoko-kernel