Hi Krzysztof,
On Tuesday 10 January 2017 11:55 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 06:09:40PM +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>> BTW What is interesting is that the Exynos7 dts patch [2] has never
>> made it into upstream for some reason. In the meantime however
>>
Hi Krzysztof,
On Tuesday 10 January 2017 11:55 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 06:09:40PM +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>> BTW What is interesting is that the Exynos7 dts patch [2] has never
>> made it into upstream for some reason. In the meantime however
>>
On 01/10/2017 11:59 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:37:24AM -0700, Shuah Khan wrote:
>> On 01/10/2017 11:23 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>>> I also think that regardless of what is decided on making susp_clk
>>> non-optional for some Exynos SoCs we should
On 01/10/2017 11:59 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:37:24AM -0700, Shuah Khan wrote:
>> On 01/10/2017 11:23 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>>> I also think that regardless of what is decided on making susp_clk
>>> non-optional for some Exynos SoCs we should
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:37:24AM -0700, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 01/10/2017 11:23 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > I also think that regardless of what is decided on making susp_clk
> > non-optional for some Exynos SoCs we should probably remove the debug
> > message as it doesn't bring
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:37:24AM -0700, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 01/10/2017 11:23 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > I also think that regardless of what is decided on making susp_clk
> > non-optional for some Exynos SoCs we should probably remove the debug
> > message as it doesn't bring
On 01/10/2017 11:23 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 07:03:57 PM Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 11:23:38 PM Anand Moon wrote:
>>> Hi Shuah,
>>>
>>> On 10 January 2017 at 21:58, Shuah Khan
On 01/10/2017 11:23 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 07:03:57 PM Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 11:23:38 PM Anand Moon wrote:
>>> Hi Shuah,
>>>
>>> On 10 January 2017 at 21:58, Shuah Khan wrote:
On 01/10/2017
Hi Bartlomiej,
On 10 January 2017 at 23:33, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 11:23:38 PM Anand Moon wrote:
>> Hi Shuah,
>>
>> On 10 January 2017 at 21:58, Shuah Khan wrote:
>> > On 01/10/2017 09:05 AM,
Hi Bartlomiej,
On 10 January 2017 at 23:33, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 11:23:38 PM Anand Moon wrote:
>> Hi Shuah,
>>
>> On 10 January 2017 at 21:58, Shuah Khan wrote:
>> > On 01/10/2017 09:05 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi,
>>
On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 07:03:57 PM Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 11:23:38 PM Anand Moon wrote:
> > Hi Shuah,
> >
> > On 10 January 2017 at 21:58, Shuah Khan wrote:
> > > On 01/10/2017 09:05 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 07:03:57 PM Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 11:23:38 PM Anand Moon wrote:
> > Hi Shuah,
> >
> > On 10 January 2017 at 21:58, Shuah Khan wrote:
> > > On 01/10/2017 09:05 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi,
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 06:09:40PM +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> BTW What is interesting is that the Exynos7 dts patch [2] has never
> made it into upstream for some reason. In the meantime however
> Exynos5433 (similar to Exynos7 to some degree) became the user of
> susp_clk.
>
>
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 06:09:40PM +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> BTW What is interesting is that the Exynos7 dts patch [2] has never
> made it into upstream for some reason. In the meantime however
> Exynos5433 (similar to Exynos7 to some degree) became the user of
> susp_clk.
>
>
Hi,
On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 11:23:38 PM Anand Moon wrote:
> Hi Shuah,
>
> On 10 January 2017 at 21:58, Shuah Khan wrote:
> > On 01/10/2017 09:05 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 07:36:35 AM Shuah Khan wrote:
Hi,
On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 11:23:38 PM Anand Moon wrote:
> Hi Shuah,
>
> On 10 January 2017 at 21:58, Shuah Khan wrote:
> > On 01/10/2017 09:05 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 07:36:35 AM Shuah Khan wrote:
> >>> On 01/10/2017
Hi Shuah,
On 10 January 2017 at 21:58, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 01/10/2017 09:05 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 07:36:35 AM Shuah Khan wrote:
>>> On 01/10/2017 07:16 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
On 01/10/2017 05:05 AM,
Hi Shuah,
On 10 January 2017 at 21:58, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 01/10/2017 09:05 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 07:36:35 AM Shuah Khan wrote:
>>> On 01/10/2017 07:16 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
On 01/10/2017 05:05 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
On 2017-01-10 22:39, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Hi,
On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 09:28:52 AM Shuah Khan wrote:
On 01/10/2017 09:05 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 07:36:35 AM Shuah Khan wrote:
>> On 01/10/2017 07:16 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
>>>
On 2017-01-10 22:39, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Hi,
On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 09:28:52 AM Shuah Khan wrote:
On 01/10/2017 09:05 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 07:36:35 AM Shuah Khan wrote:
>> On 01/10/2017 07:16 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
>>>
Hi,
On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 09:28:52 AM Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 01/10/2017 09:05 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 07:36:35 AM Shuah Khan wrote:
> >> On 01/10/2017 07:16 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
> >>> On 01/10/2017 05:05 AM, Bartlomiej
Hi,
On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 09:28:52 AM Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 01/10/2017 09:05 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 07:36:35 AM Shuah Khan wrote:
> >> On 01/10/2017 07:16 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
> >>> On 01/10/2017 05:05 AM, Bartlomiej
On 01/10/2017 09:05 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 07:36:35 AM Shuah Khan wrote:
>> On 01/10/2017 07:16 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
>>> On 01/10/2017 05:05 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Hi,
On Monday, January 09, 2017 07:21:31
On 01/10/2017 09:05 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 07:36:35 AM Shuah Khan wrote:
>> On 01/10/2017 07:16 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
>>> On 01/10/2017 05:05 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Hi,
On Monday, January 09, 2017 07:21:31
Hi,
On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 07:36:35 AM Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 01/10/2017 07:16 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
> > On 01/10/2017 05:05 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Monday, January 09, 2017 07:21:31 PM Shuah Khan wrote:
> >>> Fix dwc3_exynos_probe() to call
Hi,
On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 07:36:35 AM Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 01/10/2017 07:16 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
> > On 01/10/2017 05:05 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Monday, January 09, 2017 07:21:31 PM Shuah Khan wrote:
> >>> Fix dwc3_exynos_probe() to call
On 01/10/2017 07:16 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 01/10/2017 05:05 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Monday, January 09, 2017 07:21:31 PM Shuah Khan wrote:
>>> Fix dwc3_exynos_probe() to call clk_prepare_enable() only when suspend
>>> clock is specified. Call
On 01/10/2017 04:20 AM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> Hello!
>
> On 01/10/2017 05:21 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
>
>> Fix dwc3_exynos_probe() to call clk_prepare_enable() only when suspend
>> clock is specified. Call clk_disable_unprepare() from remove and probe
>> error path only when susp_clk has been
On 01/10/2017 04:20 AM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> Hello!
>
> On 01/10/2017 05:21 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
>
>> Fix dwc3_exynos_probe() to call clk_prepare_enable() only when suspend
>> clock is specified. Call clk_disable_unprepare() from remove and probe
>> error path only when susp_clk has been
On 01/10/2017 07:16 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 01/10/2017 05:05 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Monday, January 09, 2017 07:21:31 PM Shuah Khan wrote:
>>> Fix dwc3_exynos_probe() to call clk_prepare_enable() only when suspend
>>> clock is specified. Call
On 01/10/2017 05:05 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Monday, January 09, 2017 07:21:31 PM Shuah Khan wrote:
>> Fix dwc3_exynos_probe() to call clk_prepare_enable() only when suspend
>> clock is specified. Call clk_disable_unprepare() from remove and probe
>> error path only
On 01/10/2017 05:05 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Monday, January 09, 2017 07:21:31 PM Shuah Khan wrote:
>> Fix dwc3_exynos_probe() to call clk_prepare_enable() only when suspend
>> clock is specified. Call clk_disable_unprepare() from remove and probe
>> error path only
Hi,
On Monday, January 09, 2017 07:21:31 PM Shuah Khan wrote:
> Fix dwc3_exynos_probe() to call clk_prepare_enable() only when suspend
> clock is specified. Call clk_disable_unprepare() from remove and probe
> error path only when susp_clk has been set from remove and probe error
> paths.
It is
Hi,
On Monday, January 09, 2017 07:21:31 PM Shuah Khan wrote:
> Fix dwc3_exynos_probe() to call clk_prepare_enable() only when suspend
> clock is specified. Call clk_disable_unprepare() from remove and probe
> error path only when susp_clk has been set from remove and probe error
> paths.
It is
Hello!
On 01/10/2017 05:21 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
Fix dwc3_exynos_probe() to call clk_prepare_enable() only when suspend
clock is specified. Call clk_disable_unprepare() from remove and probe
error path only when susp_clk has been set from remove and probe error
paths.
Signed-off-by: Shuah
Hello!
On 01/10/2017 05:21 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
Fix dwc3_exynos_probe() to call clk_prepare_enable() only when suspend
clock is specified. Call clk_disable_unprepare() from remove and probe
error path only when susp_clk has been set from remove and probe error
paths.
Signed-off-by: Shuah
Fix dwc3_exynos_probe() to call clk_prepare_enable() only when suspend
clock is specified. Call clk_disable_unprepare() from remove and probe
error path only when susp_clk has been set from remove and probe error
paths.
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan
---
Fix dwc3_exynos_probe() to call clk_prepare_enable() only when suspend
clock is specified. Call clk_disable_unprepare() from remove and probe
error path only when susp_clk has been set from remove and probe error
paths.
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan
---
drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c | 10
38 matches
Mail list logo