[U-Boot] Too Much Email

How can I go about configuring u-boot email to only send emails that pertain to a response to my question?
Thanks Jack
John M Moran General Dynamics C4S 77 "A" St. Needham, MA, 02494 Phone: 781-455-4071 Email: jack.moran@gdc4s.com

Dear "Moran, Jack",
In message 3DFFB0670A395946974CE996C72073241BF283C5@NDHMC4SXCH.gdc4s.com you wrote:
How can I go about configuring u-boot email to only send emails that pertain to a response to my question?
You cannot. This is a mailing list.
If you don;t want to receive thelist messages, you can always unsubscribe.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk

Hello Moran, Jack,
Am 2010-07-18 09:08:05, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
How can I go about configuring u-boot email to only send emails that pertain to a response to my question?
You can't.
But maybe you setup a local filter (procmail, maildrop, sieve, ...) and filter <u-boot> messages to a seperated folder?
Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening Michelle Konzack

Hi Moran.
create one message filter in your email client. :)
On 07/18/2010 09:08 PM, Moran, Jack wrote:
How can I go about configuring u-boot email to only send emails that pertain to a response to my question?
Thanks Jack
John M Moran General Dynamics C4S 77 "A" St. Needham, MA, 02494 Phone: 781-455-4071 Email: jack.moran@gdc4s.com
U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

get_timer_masked() should return current timestamp, not current ticks from hardware register.
Tested on one custom board with NAND flash. Without this patch, NAND write always TIMEOUT because get_timer(0) return a big value.
This patch applies for u-boot-2010.06
Signed-off-by: Li Haibo hbli@sinocastel.com --- arch/arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/mx51/timer.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/mx51/timer.c b/arch/arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/mx51/timer.c index 81c4a06..110edbf 100644 --- a/arch/arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/mx51/timer.c +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/mx51/timer.c @@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ ulong get_timer_masked(void) timestamp += ((0xFFFFFFFF / (CONFIG_MX51_CLK32 / CONFIG_SYS_HZ)) - lastinc) + val; lastinc = val; - return val; + return timestamp; }
ulong get_timer(ulong base)

Dear Stefano,
In message 1279714212.2643.32.camel@localhost Li Haibo wrote:
get_timer_masked() should return current timestamp, not current ticks from hardware register.
Tested on one custom board with NAND flash. Without this patch, NAND write always TIMEOUT because get_timer(0) return a big value.
This patch applies for u-boot-2010.06
Signed-off-by: Li Haibo hbli@sinocastel.com
arch/arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/mx51/timer.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
Can you please have a look at this, and eventually send a pull req? Thanks.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk

Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Stefano,
Hi Wolfgang,
Can you please have a look at this, and eventually send a pull req? Thanks.
Thanks, I missed it. I would change the name of the maintainer and I will set myself for the MX51EVK, because Fred Fan resigned as maintainer for this board.
Li, could you please resend your patch as text ? It was sent as base-64 encoded, and I cannot directly apply it.
Thanks, Stefano Babic

Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Stefano,
Hi Wolfgang,
Can you please have a look at this, and eventually send a pull req? Thanks.
Thanks, I missed it. I would change the name of the maintainer and I will set myself for the MX51EVK, because Fred Fan resigned as maintainer for this board.
Li, could you please resend your patch as text ? It was sent as base-64 encoded, and I cannot directly apply it.
Thanks, Stefano Babic
get_timer_masked() should return current timestamp, not current ticks from hardware register.
Tested on one custom board with NAND flash. Without this patch, NAND write always TIMEOUT because get_timer(0) return a big value.
This patch applies for u-boot-2010.06
Signed-off-by: Li Haibo hbli@sinocastel.com --- arch/arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/mx51/timer.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/mx51/timer.c b/arch/arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/mx51/timer.c index 81c4a06..110edbf 100644 --- a/arch/arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/mx51/timer.c +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/mx51/timer.c @@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ ulong get_timer_masked(void) timestamp += ((0xFFFFFFFF / (CONFIG_MX51_CLK32 / CONFIG_SYS_HZ)) - lastinc) + val; lastinc = val; - return val; + return timestamp; }
ulong get_timer(ulong base)

Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Stefano,
Hi Wolfgang,
Can you please have a look at this, and eventually send a pull req? Thanks.
Thanks, I missed it. I would change the name of the maintainer and I will set myself for the MX51EVK, because Fred Fan resigned as maintainer for this board.
Li, could you please resend your patch as text ? It was sent as base-64 encoded, and I cannot directly apply it.
Thanks, Stefano Babic
get_timer_masked() should return current timestamp, not current ticks from hardware register.
Tested on one custom board with NAND flash. Without this patch, NAND write always TIMEOUT because get_timer(0) return a big value.
This patch applies for u-boot-2010.06
Signed-off-by: Li Haibo hbli@sinocastel.com
--- arch/arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/mx51/timer.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/mx51/timer.c b/arch/arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/mx51/timer.c index 81c4a06..110edbf 100644 --- a/arch/arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/mx51/timer.c +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/arm_cortexa8/mx51/timer.c @@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ ulong get_timer_masked(void) timestamp += ((0xFFFFFFFF / (CONFIG_MX51_CLK32 / CONFIG_SYS_HZ)) - lastinc) + val; lastinc = val; - return val; + return timestamp; }
ulong get_timer(ulong base)

Hi Haibo Li
I am try to help on test patch. :) you should not include the reply in your patch. those reply message will goto git commit message which is not needed.
On 08/10/2010 10:57 AM, Li Haibo wrote:
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Stefano,
Hi Wolfgang,
Can you please have a look at this, and eventually send a pull req? Thanks.
Thanks, I missed it. I would change the name of the maintainer and I will set myself for the MX51EVK, because Fred Fan resigned as maintainer for this board.
Li, could you please resend your patch as text ? It was sent as base-64 encoded, and I cannot directly apply it.
Thanks, Stefano Babic

Hi Haibo Li
I am try to help on test patch. :) you should not include the reply in your patch. those reply message will goto git commit message which is not needed.
On 08/10/2010 10:57 AM, Li Haibo wrote:
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Stefano,
Hi Wolfgang,
Can you please have a look at this, and eventually send a pull req? Thanks.
Thanks, I missed it. I would change the name of the maintainer and I will set myself for the MX51EVK, because Fred Fan resigned as maintainer for this board.
Li, could you please resend your patch as text ? It was sent as base-64 encoded, and I cannot directly apply it.
Thanks, Stefano Babic
Hi Liu: Thanks for you help, but I need more :) I'm newbie to such maillist. I post this small patch to check if everything is OK, but...
There are something I want know: 1. Does "base-64 encoded" problem still exist in this message? 2. Should I follow this thread, or resend a new one?

Hi
Hi Liu: Thanks for you help, but I need more :) I'm newbie to such maillist. I post this small patch to check if everything is OK, but...
There are something I want know:
- Does "base-64 encoded" problem still exist in this message?
the last two emails you send are same. first one is "base-64 encoded" second is good.
- Should I follow this thread, or resend a new one?
I think send a new one title with "[PATCH] v2". you should use "git send-email" to send patch emails.
participants (7)
-
"Xiangfu Liu(刘向富)"
-
Li Haibo
-
Michelle Konzack
-
Moran, Jack
-
Stefano Babic
-
Wolfgang Denk
-
Xiangfu Liu