On Friday 31 January 2014 05:15 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 02:20:48PM -0500, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>
> [ snip ]
>
>>> note that because of pm_runtime_set_active() that first
>>> pm_runtime_get_sync() in probe() will simply increase the reference
>>> counter with
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 02:20:48PM -0500, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
[ snip ]
> > note that because of pm_runtime_set_active() that first
> > pm_runtime_get_sync() in probe() will simply increase the reference
> > counter without calling my ->runtime_resume() callback, which is exactly
> > wha
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 04:13:19PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Jan 2014, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>
> > probe()
> > {
> > ...
> >
> > clk_get(dev, "fck");
> > clk_prepare(clk);
> > clk_enable(clk);
> > pm_runtime_set_active(dev);
> > pm_runtime_enable(dev);
> > pm
On Fri, 31 Jan 2014, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> probe()
> {
> ...
>
> clk_get(dev, "fck");
> clk_prepare(clk);
> clk_enable(clk);
> pm_runtime_set_active(dev);
> pm_runtime_enable(dev);
> pm_runtime_get_sync(dev);
> ...
> }
> note that because of pm_run
On Friday 31 January 2014 11:45 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 10:50:40AM -0500, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>> On Friday 31 January 2014 10:47 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 10:43:21AM -0500, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
On Friday 31 January 2014 10:19 AM, Fel
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 10:50:40AM -0500, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> On Friday 31 January 2014 10:47 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 10:43:21AM -0500, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> >> On Friday 31 January 2014 10:19 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014
On Friday 31 January 2014 10:47 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 10:43:21AM -0500, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>> On Friday 31 January 2014 10:19 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 03:20:26PM +0200, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
The Keystone PM management
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 10:43:21AM -0500, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> On Friday 31 January 2014 10:19 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 03:20:26PM +0200, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
> >> The Keystone PM management layer has been implemented using PM bus for
> >> power man
On Friday 31 January 2014 10:19 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 03:20:26PM +0200, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
>> The Keystone PM management layer has been implemented using PM bus for
>> power management clocks. As result, most of Keystone drivers don't need
>> to manage clo
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 03:20:26PM +0200, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
> The Keystone PM management layer has been implemented using PM bus for
> power management clocks. As result, most of Keystone drivers don't need
> to manage clocks directly. They just need to enable runtime PM and use it
> to
On Friday 31 January 2014 08:20 AM, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
> The Keystone PM management layer has been implemented using PM bus for
> power management clocks. As result, most of Keystone drivers don't need
> to manage clocks directly. They just need to enable runtime PM and use it
> to handle the
The Keystone PM management layer has been implemented using PM bus for
power management clocks. As result, most of Keystone drivers don't need
to manage clocks directly. They just need to enable runtime PM and use it
to handle their PM state and clocks.
Hence, remove clock management code and swit
12 matches
Mail list logo
