From owner-svn-src-all@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 29 18:15:21 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2AEC0193; Thu, 29 May 2014 18:15:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gromit.grondar.org (grandfather.grondar.org [IPv6:2a01:348:0:15:5d59:5c20:0:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E548A25BA; Thu, 29 May 2014 18:15:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [2001:470:9174:1:15cb:b075:b4d8:4c48] by gromit.grondar.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1Wq4rC-0009At-7H; Thu, 29 May 2014 19:15:18 +0100 Subject: Re: svn commit: r266083 - in head/sys/arm: arm include Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.2\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 From: Mark R V Murray In-Reply-To: <9412A358-EBCB-4A5A-B728-2A15C50FC217@fh-muenster.de> Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 19:15:40 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <201405141911.s4EJBFZZ097826@svn.freebsd.org> <537D0952.2040001@selasky.org> <7610C8E6-3F01-4317-BC1A-67645A162CD7@FreeBSD.org> <53871493.2010502@selasky.org> <9412A358-EBCB-4A5A-B728-2A15C50FC217@fh-muenster.de> To: Michael Tuexen X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.2) X-SA-Score: -1.0 Cc: Hans Petter Selasky , svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 18:15:21 -0000 On 29 May 2014, at 19:13, Michael Tuexen wrote: >> I can make it work on RPI, but trying to find what else it will/won=92t= work on is more problematic. > Wouldn't it require to use different registers on the RPI? This would = mean you > would need more #ifdefs=85 Thats the problem; too many #ifdefs. M --=20 Mark R V Murray