On 03/02/15 16:08, Kalle Valo wrote:
Arend van Spriel writes:
Now that there is not 3.20 version. My understanding is that this
patch will be in linus' tree 4.1-rc1, right?
Yes. It will go into linux-next first, which you can consider to be an
incubator where all stuff for the next release
On 03/02/15 16:08, Kalle Valo wrote:
Arend van Sprielar...@broadcom.com writes:
Now that there is not 3.20 version. My understanding is that this
patch will be in linus' tree 4.1-rc1, right?
Yes. It will go into linux-next first, which you can consider to be an
incubator where all stuff for
Arend van Spriel writes:
>> Now that there is not 3.20 version. My understanding is that this
>> patch will be in linus' tree 4.1-rc1, right?
>
> Yes. It will go into linux-next first, which you can consider to be an
> incubator where all stuff for the next release is integrated. Stuff
> will be
Arend van Spriel ar...@broadcom.com writes:
Now that there is not 3.20 version. My understanding is that this
patch will be in linus' tree 4.1-rc1, right?
Yes. It will go into linux-next first, which you can consider to be an
incubator where all stuff for the next release is integrated.
On 02/27/15 08:53, Fu, Zhonghui wrote:
On 2015/2/16 17:35, Arend van Spriel wrote:
On 02/16/15 08:34, Fu, Zhonghui wrote:
On 2015/2/15 22:54, Kalle Valo wrote:
Arend van Spriel writes:
On 02/15/15 04:27, Pat Erley wrote:
On 02/14/2015 08:40 PM, Fu, Zhonghui wrote:
Any comments to this
On 02/27/15 08:53, Fu, Zhonghui wrote:
On 2015/2/16 17:35, Arend van Spriel wrote:
On 02/16/15 08:34, Fu, Zhonghui wrote:
On 2015/2/15 22:54, Kalle Valo wrote:
Arend van Sprielar...@broadcom.com writes:
On 02/15/15 04:27, Pat Erley wrote:
On 02/14/2015 08:40 PM, Fu, Zhonghui wrote:
On 2015/2/16 17:35, Arend van Spriel wrote:
> On 02/16/15 08:34, Fu, Zhonghui wrote:
>>
>> On 2015/2/15 22:54, Kalle Valo wrote:
>>> Arend van Spriel writes:
>>>
On 02/15/15 04:27, Pat Erley wrote:
> On 02/14/2015 08:40 PM, Fu, Zhonghui wrote:
>> Any comments to this patch? Can it
On 2015/2/16 17:50, David Laight wrote:
>>> WiFi chip has 2 SDIO functions, and PM core will trigger
>>> twice suspend/resume operations for one WiFi chip to do
>>> the same things. This patch avoid this case.
> Do you want to suspend on the first or last request?
>
> In general it might be that
On 2015/2/16 17:50, David Laight wrote:
WiFi chip has 2 SDIO functions, and PM core will trigger
twice suspend/resume operations for one WiFi chip to do
the same things. This patch avoid this case.
Do you want to suspend on the first or last request?
In general it might be that one function
On 2015/2/16 17:35, Arend van Spriel wrote:
On 02/16/15 08:34, Fu, Zhonghui wrote:
On 2015/2/15 22:54, Kalle Valo wrote:
Arend van Sprielar...@broadcom.com writes:
On 02/15/15 04:27, Pat Erley wrote:
On 02/14/2015 08:40 PM, Fu, Zhonghui wrote:
Any comments to this patch? Can it be
> > WiFi chip has 2 SDIO functions, and PM core will trigger
> > twice suspend/resume operations for one WiFi chip to do
> > the same things. This patch avoid this case.
Do you want to suspend on the first or last request?
In general it might be that one function is in use and
something wants to
On 02/16/15 08:34, Fu, Zhonghui wrote:
On 2015/2/15 22:54, Kalle Valo wrote:
Arend van Spriel writes:
On 02/15/15 04:27, Pat Erley wrote:
On 02/14/2015 08:40 PM, Fu, Zhonghui wrote:
Any comments to this patch? Can it be accepted?
I assume that patches are queued up until after the merge
On 02/16/15 08:34, Fu, Zhonghui wrote:
On 2015/2/15 22:54, Kalle Valo wrote:
Arend van Sprielar...@broadcom.com writes:
On 02/15/15 04:27, Pat Erley wrote:
On 02/14/2015 08:40 PM, Fu, Zhonghui wrote:
Any comments to this patch? Can it be accepted?
I assume that patches are queued up
WiFi chip has 2 SDIO functions, and PM core will trigger
twice suspend/resume operations for one WiFi chip to do
the same things. This patch avoid this case.
Do you want to suspend on the first or last request?
In general it might be that one function is in use and
something wants to
On 2015/2/15 22:54, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Arend van Spriel writes:
>
>> On 02/15/15 04:27, Pat Erley wrote:
>>> On 02/14/2015 08:40 PM, Fu, Zhonghui wrote:
Any comments to this patch? Can it be accepted?
>> I assume that patches are queued up until after the merge window that
>> we are
Arend van Spriel writes:
> On 02/15/15 04:27, Pat Erley wrote:
>> On 02/14/2015 08:40 PM, Fu, Zhonghui wrote:
>>>
>>> Any comments to this patch? Can it be accepted?
>
> I assume that patches are queued up until after the merge window that
> we are currently in.
That's right. In the future I
a05d35ab334c20970c236fb971dae88810078c88 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fu Zhonghui
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 10:49:35 +0800
Subject: [PATCH v3] brcmfmac: avoid duplicated suspend/resume operation
WiFi chip has 2 SDIO functions, and PM core will trigger
twice suspend/resume operations for one WiFi chip
a05d35ab334c20970c236fb971dae88810078c88 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fu Zhonghui zhonghui...@linux.intel.com
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 10:49:35 +0800
Subject: [PATCH v3] brcmfmac: avoid duplicated suspend/resume operation
WiFi chip has 2 SDIO functions, and PM core will trigger
twice suspend/resume
Arend van Spriel ar...@broadcom.com writes:
On 02/15/15 04:27, Pat Erley wrote:
On 02/14/2015 08:40 PM, Fu, Zhonghui wrote:
Any comments to this patch? Can it be accepted?
I assume that patches are queued up until after the merge window that
we are currently in.
That's right. In the
On 2015/2/15 22:54, Kalle Valo wrote:
Arend van Spriel ar...@broadcom.com writes:
On 02/15/15 04:27, Pat Erley wrote:
On 02/14/2015 08:40 PM, Fu, Zhonghui wrote:
Any comments to this patch? Can it be accepted?
I assume that patches are queued up until after the merge window that
we are
: [PATCH v3] brcmfmac: avoid duplicated suspend/resume operation
WiFi chip has 2 SDIO functions, and PM core will trigger
twice suspend/resume operations for one WiFi chip to do
the same things. This patch avoid this case.
Acked-by: Arend van Spriel
Signed-off-by: Fu Zhonghui
---
Changes in v3
Any comments to this patch? Can it be accepted?
Thanks,
Zhonghui
On 2015/2/12 11:26, Fu, Zhonghui wrote:
> From a05d35ab334c20970c236fb971dae88810078c88 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Fu Zhonghui
> Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 10:49:35 +0800
> Subject: [PATCH v3] brcmfmac: avoid duplic
: avoid duplicated suspend/resume operation
WiFi chip has 2 SDIO functions, and PM core will trigger
twice suspend/resume operations for one WiFi chip to do
the same things. This patch avoid this case.
Acked-by: Arend van Spriel ar...@broadcom.com
Signed-off-by: Fu Zhonghui zhonghui
:49:35 +0800
Subject: [PATCH v3] brcmfmac: avoid duplicated suspend/resume operation
WiFi chip has 2 SDIO functions, and PM core will trigger
twice suspend/resume operations for one WiFi chip to do
the same things. This patch avoid this case.
Acked-by: Arend van Spriel ar...@broadcom.com
Signed
>From a05d35ab334c20970c236fb971dae88810078c88 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fu Zhonghui
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 10:49:35 +0800
Subject: [PATCH v3] brcmfmac: avoid duplicated suspend/resume operation
WiFi chip has 2 SDIO functions, and PM core will trigger
twice suspend/resume operations for
From a05d35ab334c20970c236fb971dae88810078c88 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fu Zhonghui zhonghui...@linux.intel.com
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 10:49:35 +0800
Subject: [PATCH v3] brcmfmac: avoid duplicated suspend/resume operation
WiFi chip has 2 SDIO functions, and PM core will trigger
twice suspend
26 matches
Mail list logo
