On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 04:00:42PM -0500, Li, Yi wrote:
> On 6/7/2017 12:59 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > Ah, consider adding PM to driver_data_test_device ?
>
> That's what I am looking now. But per my understanding, the misc_device does
> not have the hook to add PM support like those platfor
On 6/7/2017 12:59 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 02:31:54PM -0500, Li, Yi wrote:
We use the cache upon suspend to cache the firmware so that upon resume a
request will use that cache, to avoid the file lookup on disk. Doing a test
with qemu suspend + resume is possible but
On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 02:31:54PM -0500, Li, Yi wrote:
> > We use the cache upon suspend to cache the firmware so that upon resume a
> > request will use that cache, to avoid the file lookup on disk. Doing a test
> > with qemu suspend + resume is possible but that requires having access to
> > the
Hi Luis,
On 5/24/2017 2:03 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 01:46:56AM -0500, yi1...@linux.intel.com wrote:
From: Yi Li
Changes in v2:
- Rebase to Luis R. Rodriguez's 20170501-driver-data-try2
branch
- Expose DRIVER_DATA_REQ_NO_CACHE flag to public
driver
hi Luis
On 5/25/2017 5:43 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Li, Yi wrote:
This patch is for "disabling the cache" for streaming and iwlwifi case,
adding the test to verify the cache function should be a separate patch,
right? I can look more into the cache part.
H
On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 04:05:43PM -0500, Li, Yi wrote:
> hi Luis
>
>
> On 5/25/2017 5:43 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Li, Yi wrote:
> > > This patch is for "disabling the cache" for streaming and iwlwifi case,
> > > adding the test to verify the cache functi
On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Li, Yi wrote:
> This patch is for "disabling the cache" for streaming and iwlwifi case,
> adding the test to verify the cache function should be a separate patch,
> right? I can look more into the cache part.
How can we know cache was disabled without first testin
hi Luis
On 5/24/2017 2:03 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 01:46:56AM -0500, yi1...@linux.intel.com wrote:
From: Yi Li
Changes in v2:
- Rebase to Luis R. Rodriguez's 20170501-driver-data-try2
branch
- Expose DRIVER_DATA_REQ_NO_CACHE flag to public
driver_
On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 09:03:57PM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> __fw_lookup_buf() really should be
> renamed to something that reflects this is a cache lookup.
Actually I take this back, other than the cache, note that when we
fw_lookup_and_allocate_buf() we first __fw_lookup_buf() but if the
On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 01:46:56AM -0500, yi1...@linux.intel.com wrote:
> From: Yi Li
>
> Changes in v2:
>
> - Rebase to Luis R. Rodriguez's 20170501-driver-data-try2
> branch
> - Expose DRIVER_DATA_REQ_NO_CACHE flag to public
> driver_data_req_params structure, so upper drivers ca
From: Yi Li
Changes in v2:
- Rebase to Luis R. Rodriguez's 20170501-driver-data-try2
branch
- Expose DRIVER_DATA_REQ_NO_CACHE flag to public
driver_data_req_params structure, so upper drivers can ask
driver_data driver to bypass the internal caching mechanism.
This will be
11 matches
Mail list logo
