On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 02:34:21PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> > diff --git a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c
> > index f32ca29..44374b4 100644
> > --- a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c
> > +++ b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c
> > @@ -248,11 +248,30 @@ static int i2c_device_probe(struct device *dev
On 09/13/2013 06:06 AM, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
> On 09/11/2013 05:32 PM, Mika Westerberg wrote:
>> From: Aaron Lu
>>
>> This patch adds runtime PM support for the I2C bus in a similar way that
>> has been done for PCI bus already. This means that the I2C bus core
>> prepares runtime PM for a cli
On 09/11/2013 05:32 PM, Mika Westerberg wrote:
From: Aaron Lu
This patch adds runtime PM support for the I2C bus in a similar way that
has been done for PCI bus already. This means that the I2C bus core
prepares runtime PM for a client device just before a driver is about to be
bound to it. Devi
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 02:07:48PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> IMO, this decision belongs to the PM domain, not to the core. We have
> an established legacy with the current core default (auto) and changing
> that means lots of breakage.
Yup.
> The "forbid by default" can just as easily be han
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 2:34 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Mika Westerberg writes:
>
>> From: Aaron Lu
>>
>> This patch adds runtime PM support for the I2C bus in a similar way that
>> has been done for PCI bus already. This means that the I2C bus core
>> prepares runtime PM for a client device just
Mika Westerberg writes:
> From: Aaron Lu
>
> This patch adds runtime PM support for the I2C bus in a similar way that
> has been done for PCI bus already. This means that the I2C bus core
> prepares runtime PM for a client device just before a driver is about to be
> bound to it. Devices that ar
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 06:32:36PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> The I2C core now prepares runtime PM on behalf of the I2C client device, so
> only thing the driver needs to do is to call pm_runtime_put() at the end of
> its ->probe().
>
> This patch converts I2C client drivers under drivers/mis
Aaron Lu writes:
> On 09/11/2013 06:32 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Tuesday, September 10, 2013 10:35:22 PM Mark Brown wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 10:04:21PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Tuesday, September 10, 2013 05:13:21 PM Mark Brown wrote:
>>>
> OK, that is very m
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 02:27:52PM +0100, Ivan T. Ivanov wrote:
> From: "Ivan T. Ivanov"
>
> The Qualcomm Universal Peripherial (QUP) wraps I2C mini-core and
> provide input and output FIFO's for it. I2C controller can operate
> as master with supported bus speeds of 100Kbps and 400Kbps.
>
> Sig
A recent patch added even more superfluous parenthesis to those, which
already were there. Remove them again.
Signed-off-by: Guennadi Liakhovetski
---
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-rcar.c |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-rcar.c b/drivers/i
When clk_get() fails, it returns an error code, not a NULL. This patch
fixes such an error handling bug.
Signed-off-by: Guennadi Liakhovetski
---
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-rcar.c |6 +++---
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-rcar.c b/drivers/i2
Using the same clock for all device instances is non-portable and obtaining
clock references by an ID without using a device pointer is discouraged.
This is also not needed, because on platforms, where this driver is used,
suitable clocks are available for the I2C controllers, that are children of
This patch adds Device Tree support to the i2c-rcar driver and respective
documentation.
Signed-off-by: Guennadi Liakhovetski
---
v2: change compatibility string to the common - format
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-rcar.txt | 22
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-rcar.c
Device Tree support for i2c-rcar isn't too complex, only usual or standard
properties are used. Apart from it several clock handling improvements are
included in this patch series.
Developed on top of -next of 12.09.2013
v2: only DT compatibility strings have been changed.
Cc: Guennadi Liakhovet
There is no need to repeatedly query clock frequency, where it is not
expected to change. The complete loop can also trivially be replaced with
a simple division. A further loop below the one, being simplified, could
also be replaced, but that would get more complicated.
Signed-off-by: Guennadi Li
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 01:04:55PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thursday, September 12, 2013 12:43:02 PM Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 10:31:45AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 12:27:43PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2013
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 01:04:28PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 01:04:55PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 12, 2013 12:43:02 PM Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 10:31:45AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 01:04:55PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thursday, September 12, 2013 12:43:02 PM Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 10:31:45AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 12:27:43PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2013
On Thursday, September 12, 2013 12:43:02 PM Mika Westerberg wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 10:31:45AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 12:27:43PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 04:51:20PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> >
> > > > I would be able to hav
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 10:31:45AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 12:27:43PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 04:51:20PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > I would be able to have this and the other patch in the SPI tree in case
> > > it overlaps with oth
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 12:27:43PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 04:51:20PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > I would be able to have this and the other patch in the SPI tree in case
> > it overlaps with other work - I'm not sure what the plan will be for
> > merging this stuf
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 12:24:47PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 06:12:43PM +0200, Samuel Ortiz wrote:
> > I think it would make more sense for you to merge that one together with
> > the related i2c changes. If you prefer that I take it through MFD,
> > please let me know
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 04:51:20PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 06:32:39PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > This patch adds runtime PM support for the SPI bus analogous to what has
> > been done for the I2C bus. This means that the SPI core prepares runtime PM
> > for a clien
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 06:12:43PM +0200, Samuel Ortiz wrote:
> Hi Mika,
>
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 06:32:37PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > The I2C core now prepares runtime PM on behalf of the I2C client device, so
> > only thing the driver needs to do is to call pm_runtime_put() at the end
24 matches
Mail list logo
