Hi Raffaele,
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 20:23:04, Raffaele Recalcati wrote:
> >
> > > +
> > > + /* check all possibilities to get best fitting
> for the
> > required freq */
> >
> > > + i_min_err = min_err = INT_MAX;
> > > +
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 23:36:18, Nicolas Luna wrote:
> Ok it's good to know.
>
> Do you know if the problem is solved in AM1808 I2C silicon module?
>
By "silicon module" you mean Logic's "System-on-Module (SoM)"?
The answer I believe is no. The solution will be implemented in
an upcoming Logic E
set verify=n this will ignore checksum
Regard's
RT
--- On Thu, 29/7/10, Nicolas Luna wrote:
From: Nicolas Luna
Subject: Boot time
To: davinci-linux-open-source@linux.davincidsp.com
Date: Thursday, 29 July, 2010, 0:59
Hi guys,
I'm trying to make by board boot as quick as possible. I did some o
Ok it's good to know.
Do you know if the problem is solved in AM1808 I2C silicon module?
Thanks
Nicolas
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Todd Fischer wrote:
> Nicolas,
>
> The polling TPS6507x touchscreen driver works without error (just uses 2%
> of the CPU). It is the hw design when usin
Nicolas,
The polling TPS6507x touchscreen driver works without error (just uses
2% of the CPU). It is the hw design when using the I2C silicon module
in the L138 that has the problem.
Todd
On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 09:18 -0400, Nicolas Luna wrote:
> Todd,
>
>
>
> Is it possible that the problem
Hi Nori,
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/clock.c
> > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/clock.c
> > > @@ -254,7 +254,15 @@ static unsigned long
> > clk_sysclk_recalc(struct clk *clk)
> > > u32 v, plldiv;
> > > struct pll_data *pll;
> > > unsigned
Todd,
Is it possible that the problem occurs because the driver is using polling
and it polls the PMIC to fast and it cannot handles all commands received so
it returns NACK?
Thanks
Nicolas
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 8:24 AM, Nicolas Luna wrote:
> Todd,
>
> Yes the polling is not such a problem
The current implementation of NAPI poll function in the driver does not service
Rx packets, error condition even if a single Tx packet gets serviced in
the napi poll call. This behavior severely affects performance for specific use
cases. This patch modifies the poll function implementation to serv
DaVinci EMAC module includes an interrupt pacing block that can
be programmed to throttle the rate at which interrupts are
generated. This patch implements interrupt pacing logic that can
be controlled through the ethtool interface(only rx_coalesce_usecs
param is honored)
Signed-off-by: Sriramakri
The EMAC modules control registers vary as per the version of the
EMAC module. EMAC_CTRL_EWCTL,EMAC_CTRL_EWINTTCNT are available
only on EMAC_VERSION_1. The emac_dump_regs() function accesses
these indiscriminately. This patch fixes the issue.
Signed-off-by: Sriramakrishnan
---
drivers/net/davin
Todd,
Yes the polling is not such a problem because 2% is not that much. Probably
that the bitbang will be more than that it's why I would like to avoid it.
If there is a hardware mod to correct NACK problem I'll be glad to apply it.
Thanks,
Nicolas
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 7:43 AM, Todd Fisc
Nicolas,
Also, due to another hardware limitation, the touch screen driver using
polling instead of interrupts. I heard a hardware change that will
allow for interrupts to be used is planned as well. The polling
overhead costs around 2% ARM CPU.
Todd
On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 10:42 +0530, Nori, Se
This patch adds support for the MityDSP-L138 and MityARM-1808 system on
module (SOM) under the registered machine "mityomapl138". These SOMs
are based on the da850 davinci CPU architecture. Information on these
SOMs may be found at http://www.mitydsp.com.
Signed-off-by: Michael Williamson
---
Sekhar,
Thank you for the advice. I would like to know if you are aware of the
modification that will be made by Logic. I suppose that if Logic is in the
loop it means that the problem is hardware?
I have custom hardware based on OMAPL138 EVM. We are releasing the REV2 very
soon, so maybe I could
Hi Raffaele,
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 22:09:20, Raffaele Recalcati wrote:
> 2010/7/22 Nori, Sekhar
>
[...]
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/clock.c
> b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/clock.c
> > index f29a526..6e45808 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/clock.c
> > +++ b/
On Thursday 29 July 2010 10:40:49 am Theo Debrouwere wrote:
> > But my favourite optimization was removing u-boot completely and booting
> > Linux kernel from ubl directly. Though this is not an option for
> > everyone.
>
> What did you do for this? Any UBL patch available to take a look at?
>
T
But my favourite optimization was removing u-boot completely and booting Linux
kernel from ubl directly. Though this is not an option for everyone.
What did you do for this? Any UBL patch available to take a look at?
Theo
DISCLAIMER:
Unless indicated otherwise, the information contained in
On Wednesday 28 July 2010 10:59:53 pm Nicolas Luna wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
Hi,
> I'm trying to make by board boot as quick as possible. I did some
> optimisation with the "All This For 1 Second Boot" wiki and other website.
> I would like to reduce a little bit more the boot time and I wonder if y
18 matches
Mail list logo
