On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 03:45:11PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
Thierry Reding thierry.red...@gmail.com writes:
I just noticed these patches because they conflicted with some of the
local patches I had to add a very similar framework. One of the reasons
why I hadn't posted these publicly
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 05:27:57PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 09/25, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 05:29:10PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
On 25 September 2014 13:21, Thierry Reding thierry.red...@gmail.com
wrote:
I just noticed these patches because they conflicted
Hi Thierry,
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Thierry Reding
thierry.red...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 03:45:11PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
Thierry Reding thierry.red...@gmail.com writes:
I just noticed these patches because they conflicted with some of the
local patches I had
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 10:06:24AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
Hi Thierry,
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Thierry Reding
thierry.red...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 03:45:11PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
Thierry Reding thierry.red...@gmail.com writes:
I just noticed
Hi Thierry,
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:56 AM, Thierry Reding
thierry.red...@gmail.com wrote:
An alternative would be to make the power-domain controller look up the
clock within the user's device tree node. That could be problematic,
because while the module clock is always the first clock
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 12:01:13PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
Hi Thierry,
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:56 AM, Thierry Reding
thierry.red...@gmail.com wrote:
An alternative would be to make the power-domain controller look up the
clock within the user's device tree node. That could
Thierry Reding thierry.red...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 03:45:11PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
Thierry Reding thierry.red...@gmail.com writes:
I just noticed these patches because they conflicted with some of the
local patches I had to add a very similar framework. One of
I just noticed these patches because they conflicted with some of the
local patches I had to add a very similar framework. One of the reasons
why I hadn't posted these publicly yet is because the platform where I
want to use this (Tegra) is somewhat quirky when it comes to power
domains.
On Tegra
On 25 September 2014 13:21, Thierry Reding thierry.red...@gmail.com wrote:
I just noticed these patches because they conflicted with some of the
local patches I had to add a very similar framework. One of the reasons
why I hadn't posted these publicly yet is because the platform where I
want
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 05:29:10PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
On 25 September 2014 13:21, Thierry Reding thierry.red...@gmail.com wrote:
I just noticed these patches because they conflicted with some of the
local patches I had to add a very similar framework. One of the reasons
why I hadn't
Thierry Reding thierry.red...@gmail.com writes:
I just noticed these patches because they conflicted with some of the
local patches I had to add a very similar framework. One of the reasons
why I hadn't posted these publicly yet is because the platform where I
want to use this (Tegra) is
On 09/25, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 05:29:10PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
On 25 September 2014 13:21, Thierry Reding thierry.red...@gmail.com wrote:
I just noticed these patches because they conflicted with some of the
local patches I had to add a very similar
Stephen Boyd sb...@codeaurora.org writes:
On 09/25, Thierry Reding wrote:
[...]
The critical part is that we need to enable the clock after the
partition has been powered, but before the clamps are removed.
Implementing this with runtime PM support in drivers won't work
because the power
Hi Rafael,
On 09/22/2014 05:19 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Friday, September 19, 2014 11:48:49 AM Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
Hi Ulf,
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 08:27:33PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
Changes in v5:
- Converted dev_pm_domain_detach() to a void function
- Added a -detach()
On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 03:44:07 PM Grygorii Strashko wrote:
Hi Rafael,
On 09/22/2014 05:19 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Friday, September 19, 2014 11:48:49 AM Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
Hi Ulf,
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 08:27:33PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
Changes in v5:
-
On 09/24/2014 04:51 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 03:44:07 PM Grygorii Strashko wrote:
Hi Rafael,
On 09/22/2014 05:19 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Friday, September 19, 2014 11:48:49 AM Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
Hi Ulf,
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 08:27:33PM
On Friday, September 19, 2014 11:48:49 AM Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
Hi Ulf,
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 08:27:33PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
Changes in v5:
- Converted dev_pm_domain_detach() to a void function
- Added a -detach() callback to the PM domain struct, invoked from the
On 22 September 2014 16:19, Rafael J. Wysocki r...@rjwysocki.net wrote:
On Friday, September 19, 2014 11:48:49 AM Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
Hi Ulf,
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 08:27:33PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
Changes in v5:
- Converted dev_pm_domain_detach() to a void function
-
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 04:19:54PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
I've queued up this patchset for 3.18 (I fixed up the two minor issues pointed
to by Geert in the process).
Oh, dear. I'd been hoping to be able to test the series on my s3c4xx
system but I don't get home until tomorrow :/
Changes in v5:
- Converted dev_pm_domain_detach() to a void function
- Added a -detach() callback to the PM domain struct, invoked from the
dev_pm_domain_detach().
- Make ACPI and genpd both assign the -detach() callback at successfull
attachment.
Hi Ulf,
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 08:27:33PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
Changes in v5:
- Converted dev_pm_domain_detach() to a void function
- Added a -detach() callback to the PM domain struct, invoked from the
dev_pm_domain_detach().
- Make ACPI and genpd both assign
21 matches
Mail list logo
