On 09/30/2014 10:03 PM, Mike Turquette wrote:
Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-09-30 01:48:49)
On 09/30/2014 10:07 AM, Mike Turquette wrote:
Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-09-29 01:09:24)
On 09/27/2014 02:24 AM, Mike Turquette wrote:
Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-09-26 00:18:55)
On 09/26/2014 04:35 AM,
On 09/30/2014 10:03 PM, Mike Turquette wrote:
Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-09-30 01:48:49)
On 09/30/2014 10:07 AM, Mike Turquette wrote:
Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-09-29 01:09:24)
On 09/27/2014 02:24 AM, Mike Turquette wrote:
Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-09-26 00:18:55)
On 09/26/2014 04:35 AM,
Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-09-30 01:48:49)
> On 09/30/2014 10:07 AM, Mike Turquette wrote:
> > Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-09-29 01:09:24)
> >> On 09/27/2014 02:24 AM, Mike Turquette wrote:
> >>> Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-09-26 00:18:55)
> On 09/26/2014 04:35 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > On
On 09/30/2014 10:07 AM, Mike Turquette wrote:
Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-09-29 01:09:24)
On 09/27/2014 02:24 AM, Mike Turquette wrote:
Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-09-26 00:18:55)
On 09/26/2014 04:35 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 09/23/14 06:38, Tero Kristo wrote:
On 09/22/2014 10:18 PM, Stephen
Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-09-29 01:09:24)
> On 09/27/2014 02:24 AM, Mike Turquette wrote:
> > Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-09-26 00:18:55)
> >> On 09/26/2014 04:35 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> >>> On 09/23/14 06:38, Tero Kristo wrote:
> On 09/22/2014 10:18 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > On 08/21,
Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-09-29 01:09:24)
On 09/27/2014 02:24 AM, Mike Turquette wrote:
Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-09-26 00:18:55)
On 09/26/2014 04:35 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 09/23/14 06:38, Tero Kristo wrote:
On 09/22/2014 10:18 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 08/21, Tero Kristo wrote:
On 09/30/2014 10:07 AM, Mike Turquette wrote:
Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-09-29 01:09:24)
On 09/27/2014 02:24 AM, Mike Turquette wrote:
Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-09-26 00:18:55)
On 09/26/2014 04:35 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 09/23/14 06:38, Tero Kristo wrote:
On 09/22/2014 10:18 PM, Stephen
Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-09-30 01:48:49)
On 09/30/2014 10:07 AM, Mike Turquette wrote:
Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-09-29 01:09:24)
On 09/27/2014 02:24 AM, Mike Turquette wrote:
Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-09-26 00:18:55)
On 09/26/2014 04:35 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 09/23/14 06:38, Tero
On 09/27/2014 02:24 AM, Mike Turquette wrote:
Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-09-26 00:18:55)
On 09/26/2014 04:35 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 09/23/14 06:38, Tero Kristo wrote:
On 09/22/2014 10:18 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 08/21, Tero Kristo wrote:
/* Skip children who will be
On 09/27/2014 02:24 AM, Mike Turquette wrote:
Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-09-26 00:18:55)
On 09/26/2014 04:35 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 09/23/14 06:38, Tero Kristo wrote:
On 09/22/2014 10:18 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 08/21, Tero Kristo wrote:
/* Skip children who will be
Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-09-26 00:18:55)
> On 09/26/2014 04:35 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > On 09/23/14 06:38, Tero Kristo wrote:
> >> On 09/22/2014 10:18 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> >>> On 08/21, Tero Kristo wrote:
> /* Skip children who will be reparented to another clock */
>
On 09/26/2014 04:35 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 09/23/14 06:38, Tero Kristo wrote:
On 09/22/2014 10:18 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 08/21, Tero Kristo wrote:
/* Skip children who will be reparented to another clock */
if (child->new_parent && child->new_parent != clk)
On 09/26/2014 04:35 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 09/23/14 06:38, Tero Kristo wrote:
On 09/22/2014 10:18 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 08/21, Tero Kristo wrote:
/* Skip children who will be reparented to another clock */
if (child-new_parent child-new_parent != clk)
Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-09-26 00:18:55)
On 09/26/2014 04:35 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 09/23/14 06:38, Tero Kristo wrote:
On 09/22/2014 10:18 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 08/21, Tero Kristo wrote:
/* Skip children who will be reparented to another clock */
if
On 09/23/14 06:38, Tero Kristo wrote:
> On 09/22/2014 10:18 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>> On 08/21, Tero Kristo wrote:
>>> /* Skip children who will be reparented to another clock */
>>> if (child->new_parent && child->new_parent != clk)
>>> continue;
>>
>> Are we
On 09/23/14 06:38, Tero Kristo wrote:
On 09/22/2014 10:18 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 08/21, Tero Kristo wrote:
/* Skip children who will be reparented to another clock */
if (child-new_parent child-new_parent != clk)
continue;
Are we not hitting the
On 09/22/2014 10:18 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 08/21, Tero Kristo wrote:
In some cases, clocks can switch their parent with clk_set_rate, for
example clk_mux can do this in some cases. Current implementation of
clk_change_rate uses un-safe list iteration on the clock children, which
will cause
On 09/22/2014 10:18 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 08/21, Tero Kristo wrote:
In some cases, clocks can switch their parent with clk_set_rate, for
example clk_mux can do this in some cases. Current implementation of
clk_change_rate uses un-safe list iteration on the clock children, which
will cause
On 08/21, Tero Kristo wrote:
> In some cases, clocks can switch their parent with clk_set_rate, for
> example clk_mux can do this in some cases. Current implementation of
> clk_change_rate uses un-safe list iteration on the clock children, which
> will cause wrong clocks to be parsed in case any
On 08/21, Tero Kristo wrote:
In some cases, clocks can switch their parent with clk_set_rate, for
example clk_mux can do this in some cases. Current implementation of
clk_change_rate uses un-safe list iteration on the clock children, which
will cause wrong clocks to be parsed in case any of
Hi Mike,
On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 12:22:03PM -0700, Mike Turquette wrote:
> Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-08-21 06:47:45)
> > In some cases, clocks can switch their parent with clk_set_rate, for
> > example clk_mux can do this in some cases. Current implementation of
> > clk_change_rate uses un-safe
Hi Mike,
On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 12:22:03PM -0700, Mike Turquette wrote:
Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-08-21 06:47:45)
In some cases, clocks can switch their parent with clk_set_rate, for
example clk_mux can do this in some cases. Current implementation of
clk_change_rate uses un-safe list
Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-08-21 06:47:45)
> In some cases, clocks can switch their parent with clk_set_rate, for
> example clk_mux can do this in some cases. Current implementation of
> clk_change_rate uses un-safe list iteration on the clock children, which
> will cause wrong clocks to be parsed
Quoting Tero Kristo (2014-08-21 06:47:45)
In some cases, clocks can switch their parent with clk_set_rate, for
example clk_mux can do this in some cases. Current implementation of
clk_change_rate uses un-safe list iteration on the clock children, which
will cause wrong clocks to be parsed in
On 16:47-20140821, Tero Kristo wrote:
> In some cases, clocks can switch their parent with clk_set_rate, for
> example clk_mux can do this in some cases. Current implementation of
> clk_change_rate uses un-safe list iteration on the clock children, which
> will cause wrong clocks to be parsed in
In some cases, clocks can switch their parent with clk_set_rate, for
example clk_mux can do this in some cases. Current implementation of
clk_change_rate uses un-safe list iteration on the clock children, which
will cause wrong clocks to be parsed in case any of the clock children
change their
In some cases, clocks can switch their parent with clk_set_rate, for
example clk_mux can do this in some cases. Current implementation of
clk_change_rate uses un-safe list iteration on the clock children, which
will cause wrong clocks to be parsed in case any of the clock children
change their
On 16:47-20140821, Tero Kristo wrote:
In some cases, clocks can switch their parent with clk_set_rate, for
example clk_mux can do this in some cases. Current implementation of
clk_change_rate uses un-safe list iteration on the clock children, which
will cause wrong clocks to be parsed in case
28 matches
Mail list logo
