- Feb 10, 2016
-
-
Federico Vaga authored
Signed-off-by:Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@cern.ch>
-
Federico Vaga authored
Signed-off-by: -
Federico Vaga authored
Signed-off-by: -
Federico Vaga authored
Signed-off-by:
-
- Dec 01, 2015
-
-
Adam Wujek authored
Signed-off-by:Adam Wujek <adam.wujek@cern.ch>
-
- Nov 30, 2015
-
-
Adam Wujek authored
with -V switch Signed-off-by:
-
- Nov 20, 2015
-
-
Adam Wujek authored
Signed-off-by: -
Adam Wujek authored
Signed-off-by: -
Adam Wujek authored
Changes in the buildsystem. Signed-off-by:
-
- Nov 13, 2015
-
-
Adam Wujek authored
Signed-off-by: -
Adam Wujek authored
Signed-off-by: -
Adam Wujek authored
Use _ABS in Makefiles wherever possible. Signed-off-by: -
Adam Wujek authored
Signed-off-by: -
Adam Wujek authored
FMC_BUS_ABS is passed to Kbuild, which uses different current directory. It is not trivial to handle FMC_BUS to be absolute or relative path. Signed-off-by: -
Adam Wujek authored
Signed-off-by: -
Adam Wujek authored
Signed-off-by: -
Adam Wujek authored
files wr_nic/.*.o.cmd were not removed Signed-off-by: -
Adam Wujek authored
This allows parallel build. Signed-off-by: -
Adam Wujek authored
Include parent_common.mk from up directory. Which may contain various environment definitions such compiler, linker, etc. If such file is not present it will not affect build. Signed-off-by: -
Adam Wujek authored
--export FMC_DRV --correct passing GIT_VERSION Signed-off-by: -
Adam Wujek authored
Signed-off-by: -
Federico Vaga authored
We were using vmalloc() assunign that its library was already included by some other libraries. Today, this is not the case anymore, so we must include it Signed-off-by:
-
- Aug 25, 2015
-
-
Federico Vaga authored
Signed-off-by:
-
- May 07, 2015
-
-
Federico Vaga authored
Mainly for compatibility (simplification) with the CERN super module. Insted of using a script to guess which fmc-bus define, assume always that parent project define the FMC_BUS to use. Signed-off-by: -
Federico Vaga authored
For the time being you must write the bitstream in a single write. For example: dd if=/home/fvaga/spec-fmc-adc-v4.0.bin of=/dev/spec-0700 obs=5000000 Signed-off-by:
-
- Apr 27, 2015
-
-
Federico Vaga authored
Signed-off-by:
-
- Apr 20, 2015
-
-
Federico Vaga authored
Typically old distro releases Signed-off-by: -
Federico Vaga authored
Signed-off-by: -
Federico Vaga authored
a channel cannot be less than 0 due to data type (uint16_t). If someone write a negative number this become something greater than 4 so the control still works Signed-off-by:
-
- Feb 24, 2015
-
-
Federico Vaga authored
Since kernel 3.18 the gpiochip_remove function return void and not an error code as before. In case the gpiochip is removed while there is a requested gpio, the kernel will print an error message. By applying this patch without any control on the kernel version we are going to loose the error message in case of trouble with old kernels Signed-off-by:
-
- Jan 20, 2015
-
-
Federico Vaga authored
Signed-off-by:
-
- Sep 18, 2014
-
-
Federico Vaga authored
Signed-off-by:
-
- Aug 13, 2014
-
-
Federico Vaga authored
There should not be any side effect on resetting the FGPA every time we program it. Confirmed by Tomasz Wlostowski <tomasz.wlostowski@cern.ch> Signed-off-by: -
Federico Vaga authored
Signed-nof -by: -
Federico Vaga authored
Signed-off-by: -
Federico Vaga authored
Signed-off-by: -
Federico Vaga authored
Signed-off-by:
-
- Aug 07, 2014
-
-
Federico Vaga authored
With some kernel configuration the previous locking policy can generate a deadlock on the spec->irq_lock spinlock. For example, this will happen sistematically if the option CONFIG_DEBUG_SHIRQ_FIXME is enabled. In this case, the handler is called immediatly an it is not a separeted thread. This patch move out from the locking section what doesn't need protection and is 'cause' of the deadlock. The deadlock was introduced with patch d4bbcc73 by using a large locking section. In realty the PCI request_irq is protected anyway thanks to the proctection of the variable 'first_time' and the 'spec_vic_irq_request' function. [more explaination about patch d4bbcc73 ] The purpose of that patch was to protect the initialization of the first VIC handler and the release of the last one. It was happening that while we are releasing the last VIC handler, some one was registering a new one but the spec->vic is still there. The result was that sometimes the PCI handler was removed (last VIC handler) but not re-requested for the incoming request. Signen-off-by:
-
- Aug 01, 2014
-
-
Federico Vaga authored
Signed-off-by: -
Federico Vaga authored
Signed-off-by:
-
