On 24.10.2020 17:43, Paweł Chmiel wrote:
This clock must be always enabled to allow access to any registers in
fsys1 CMU. Until proper solution based on runtime PM is applied
(similar to what was done for Exynos5433), mark that clock as critical
so it won't be disabled.
It was observed on Samsun
On 17.12.2020 11:14, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Not sure why this wasn't picked up in the samsung PR. Can you resend?
Hi
There was v2
(https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-samsung-soc/patch/20201107121456.25562-1-pawel.mikolaj.chm...@gmail.com/)
but it did receive some request for changes comme
Not sure why this wasn't picked up in the samsung PR. Can you resend?
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/clk-exynos7.c
> b/drivers/clk/samsung/clk-exynos7.c
> index c1ff715e960c..1048d83f097b 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/clk-exynos7.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/clk-exynos7.c
> @@ -538,7 +5
On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 05:43:46PM +0200, Paweł Chmiel wrote:
> This clock must be always enabled to allow access to any registers in
> fsys1 CMU. Until proper solution based on runtime PM is applied
> (similar to what was done for Exynos5433), mark that clock as critical
> so it won't be disabled.
Hi Paweł Chmiel,
On 10/25/20 12:43 AM, Paweł Chmiel wrote:
> This clock must be always enabled to allow access to any registers in
> fsys1 CMU. Until proper solution based on runtime PM is applied
> (similar to what was done for Exynos5433), mark that clock as critical
> so it won't be disabled.
>
This clock must be always enabled to allow access to any registers in
fsys1 CMU. Until proper solution based on runtime PM is applied
(similar to what was done for Exynos5433), mark that clock as critical
so it won't be disabled.
It was observed on Samsung Galaxy S6 device (based on Exynos7420), w
6 matches
Mail list logo
