Quoting Ulf Hansson (2013-03-18 03:36:29)
> On 15 March 2013 20:38, Stephen Warren wrote:
> > On 03/15/2013 06:33 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> >> On 15 March 2013 13:06, Bill Huang wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 18:08 +0800, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > ...
> Some prerequisites; I think am in
Quoting Ulf Hansson (2013-03-18 03:36:29)
On 15 March 2013 20:38, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 03/15/2013 06:33 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
On 15 March 2013 13:06, Bill Huang bilhu...@nvidia.com wrote:
On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 18:08 +0800, Ulf Hansson wrote:
...
Some
On 15 March 2013 20:38, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 03/15/2013 06:33 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>> On 15 March 2013 13:06, Bill Huang wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 18:08 +0800, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> ...
Some prerequisites; I think am in favor of using the clk API to
trigger DVFS changes
On 15 March 2013 20:38, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 03/15/2013 06:33 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
On 15 March 2013 13:06, Bill Huang bilhu...@nvidia.com wrote:
On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 18:08 +0800, Ulf Hansson wrote:
...
Some prerequisites; I think am in favor of using the clk API
On Sat, 2013-03-16 at 01:09 +0800, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 10:40:04PM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
> > That will be too bad, it looks like we deadlock in the mechanism, we
> > cannot change existing drivers behavior (that means some call
> > clk_disable/enable
On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 20:33 +0800, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> I guess you did not fully got what I meant with "dvfs clock type". It
> will not affect the clock API. But instead the dvfs is handled by
> implementing a specific clk hw type. So the same thing is accomplished
> as with clk notifiers, no
On Sat, 2013-03-16 at 03:38 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 03/15/2013 06:33 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > On 15 March 2013 13:06, Bill Huang wrote:
> >> On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 18:08 +0800, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> ...
> >>> Some prerequisites; I think am in favor of using the clk API to
> >>> trigger
On 03/15/2013 06:33 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On 15 March 2013 13:06, Bill Huang wrote:
>> On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 18:08 +0800, Ulf Hansson wrote:
...
>>> Some prerequisites; I think am in favor of using the clk API to
>>> trigger DVFS changes and then I agree on that clk_prepare|unprepare
>>> needs
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 06:47:53PM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-03-12 at 21:40 +0800, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 05:37:41AM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
> > > > Add the below four notifier events so
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 11:22:47PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> Is clk_set_rate() only legal to call in non-atomic contexts then? The
> header file doesn't say, although I guess since many other functions
> explicitly say they can't, then by omission it can...
I think when all this was
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 10:40:04PM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
> That will be too bad, it looks like we deadlock in the mechanism, we
> cannot change existing drivers behavior (that means some call
> clk_disable/enable directly, some are not), and we cannot hook notifier
> in clk_disable/enable
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 10:42:30PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> I believe the point Russell is making is not that the idea behind this
> patch is wrong, but simply that the function where you put the hooks is
> wrong. The hooks should at least be in clk_enable/clk_disable and not
Indeed,
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 06:47:53PM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-03-12 at 21:40 +0800, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 05:37:41AM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
> > > Add the below four notifier events so drivers which are interested in
> > > knowing the clock
On 15 March 2013 13:06, Bill Huang wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 18:08 +0800, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>> On 15 March 2013 10:39, Peter De Schrijver wrote:
>> > On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 06:22:47AM +0100, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> >> On 03/14/2013 07:20 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
>> >> > On Fri, 2013-03-15
On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 18:08 +0800, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On 15 March 2013 10:39, Peter De Schrijver wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 06:22:47AM +0100, Stephen Warren wrote:
> >> On 03/14/2013 07:20 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
> >> > On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 01:54 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
> >> >> On
On 15 March 2013 10:39, Peter De Schrijver wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 06:22:47AM +0100, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 03/14/2013 07:20 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
>> > On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 01:54 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> >> On 03/14/2013 03:28 AM, Bill Huang wrote:
>> >>> On Thu, 2013-03-14
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 06:22:47AM +0100, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 03/14/2013 07:20 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 01:54 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
> >> On 03/14/2013 03:28 AM, Bill Huang wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 2013-03-14 at 17:21 +0800, Peter De Schrijver wrote:
> On Thu,
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 06:22:47AM +0100, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 03/14/2013 07:20 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 01:54 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 03/14/2013 03:28 AM, Bill Huang wrote:
On Thu, 2013-03-14 at 17:21 +0800, Peter De Schrijver wrote:
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at
On 15 March 2013 10:39, Peter De Schrijver pdeschrij...@nvidia.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 06:22:47AM +0100, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 03/14/2013 07:20 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 01:54 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 03/14/2013 03:28 AM, Bill Huang wrote:
On Thu,
On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 18:08 +0800, Ulf Hansson wrote:
On 15 March 2013 10:39, Peter De Schrijver pdeschrij...@nvidia.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 06:22:47AM +0100, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 03/14/2013 07:20 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 01:54 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 15 March 2013 13:06, Bill Huang bilhu...@nvidia.com wrote:
On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 18:08 +0800, Ulf Hansson wrote:
On 15 March 2013 10:39, Peter De Schrijver pdeschrij...@nvidia.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 06:22:47AM +0100, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 03/14/2013 07:20 PM, Bill Huang
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 06:47:53PM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
On Tue, 2013-03-12 at 21:40 +0800, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 05:37:41AM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
Add the below four notifier events so drivers which are interested in
knowing the clock status can act
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 10:42:30PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
I believe the point Russell is making is not that the idea behind this
patch is wrong, but simply that the function where you put the hooks is
wrong. The hooks should at least be in clk_enable/clk_disable and not
Indeed,
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 10:40:04PM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
That will be too bad, it looks like we deadlock in the mechanism, we
cannot change existing drivers behavior (that means some call
clk_disable/enable directly, some are not), and we cannot hook notifier
in clk_disable/enable either,
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 11:22:47PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
Is clk_set_rate() only legal to call in non-atomic contexts then? The
header file doesn't say, although I guess since many other functions
explicitly say they can't, then by omission it can...
I think when all this was discussed
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 06:47:53PM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
On Tue, 2013-03-12 at 21:40 +0800, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 05:37:41AM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
Add the below four notifier events so drivers
On 03/15/2013 06:33 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
On 15 March 2013 13:06, Bill Huang bilhu...@nvidia.com wrote:
On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 18:08 +0800, Ulf Hansson wrote:
...
Some prerequisites; I think am in favor of using the clk API to
trigger DVFS changes and then I agree on that clk_prepare|unprepare
On Sat, 2013-03-16 at 03:38 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 03/15/2013 06:33 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
On 15 March 2013 13:06, Bill Huang bilhu...@nvidia.com wrote:
On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 18:08 +0800, Ulf Hansson wrote:
...
Some prerequisites; I think am in favor of using the clk API to
On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 20:33 +0800, Ulf Hansson wrote:
I guess you did not fully got what I meant with dvfs clock type. It
will not affect the clock API. But instead the dvfs is handled by
implementing a specific clk hw type. So the same thing is accomplished
as with clk notifiers, no changes
On Sat, 2013-03-16 at 01:09 +0800, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 10:40:04PM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
That will be too bad, it looks like we deadlock in the mechanism, we
cannot change existing drivers behavior (that means some call
clk_disable/enable directly, some
On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 13:22 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 03/14/2013 07:20 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 01:54 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
> >> On 03/14/2013 03:28 AM, Bill Huang wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 2013-03-14 at 17:21 +0800, Peter De Schrijver wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 14,
On 03/14/2013 07:20 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 01:54 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 03/14/2013 03:28 AM, Bill Huang wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2013-03-14 at 17:21 +0800, Peter De Schrijver wrote:
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 03:15:11AM +0100, Bill Huang wrote:
> I don't
On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 01:54 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 03/14/2013 03:28 AM, Bill Huang wrote:
> > On Thu, 2013-03-14 at 17:21 +0800, Peter De Schrijver wrote:
> >> On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 03:15:11AM +0100, Bill Huang wrote:
> >>
> >>> I don't think deferring will work either, considering
On 03/14/2013 03:28 AM, Bill Huang wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-03-14 at 17:21 +0800, Peter De Schrijver wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 03:15:11AM +0100, Bill Huang wrote:
>>
>>> I don't think deferring will work either, considering the usage of DVFS,
>>> device voltage is tightly coupled with
On Thu, 2013-03-14 at 17:21 +0800, Peter De Schrijver wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 03:15:11AM +0100, Bill Huang wrote:
>
> > I don't think deferring will work either, considering the usage of DVFS,
> > device voltage is tightly coupled with frequency, when clock rate is
> > about to increase,
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 03:15:11AM +0100, Bill Huang wrote:
> I don't think deferring will work either, considering the usage of DVFS,
> device voltage is tightly coupled with frequency, when clock rate is
> about to increase, we have to boost voltage first and we can lower the
> voltage after
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 03:15:11AM +0100, Bill Huang wrote:
I don't think deferring will work either, considering the usage of DVFS,
device voltage is tightly coupled with frequency, when clock rate is
about to increase, we have to boost voltage first and we can lower the
voltage after the
On Thu, 2013-03-14 at 17:21 +0800, Peter De Schrijver wrote:
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 03:15:11AM +0100, Bill Huang wrote:
I don't think deferring will work either, considering the usage of DVFS,
device voltage is tightly coupled with frequency, when clock rate is
about to increase, we have
On 03/14/2013 03:28 AM, Bill Huang wrote:
On Thu, 2013-03-14 at 17:21 +0800, Peter De Schrijver wrote:
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 03:15:11AM +0100, Bill Huang wrote:
I don't think deferring will work either, considering the usage of DVFS,
device voltage is tightly coupled with frequency, when
On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 01:54 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 03/14/2013 03:28 AM, Bill Huang wrote:
On Thu, 2013-03-14 at 17:21 +0800, Peter De Schrijver wrote:
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 03:15:11AM +0100, Bill Huang wrote:
I don't think deferring will work either, considering the usage of
On 03/14/2013 07:20 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 01:54 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 03/14/2013 03:28 AM, Bill Huang wrote:
On Thu, 2013-03-14 at 17:21 +0800, Peter De Schrijver wrote:
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 03:15:11AM +0100, Bill Huang wrote:
I don't think deferring will
On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 13:22 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 03/14/2013 07:20 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 01:54 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 03/14/2013 03:28 AM, Bill Huang wrote:
On Thu, 2013-03-14 at 17:21 +0800, Peter De Schrijver wrote:
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at
On Thu, 2013-03-14 at 02:10 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 03/12/2013 11:40 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 13:24 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
> >> On 03/12/2013 11:08 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 12:42 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 03/12/2013 07:47
On 03/12/2013 11:40 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 13:24 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 03/12/2013 11:08 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 12:42 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 03/12/2013 07:47 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-03-12 at 21:40 +0800,
On Thu, 2013-03-14 at 02:10 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 03/12/2013 11:40 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 13:24 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 03/12/2013 11:08 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 12:42 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 03/12/2013 07:47 PM, Bill Huang
On 03/12/2013 11:40 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 13:24 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 03/12/2013 11:08 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 12:42 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 03/12/2013 07:47 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
On Tue, 2013-03-12 at 21:40 +0800, Russell King - ARM
On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 13:24 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 03/12/2013 11:08 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 12:42 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
> >> On 03/12/2013 07:47 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 2013-03-12 at 21:40 +0800, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue,
On 03/12/2013 11:08 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 12:42 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 03/12/2013 07:47 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2013-03-12 at 21:40 +0800, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 05:37:41AM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
> Add the
On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 12:42 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 03/12/2013 07:47 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-03-12 at 21:40 +0800, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> >> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 05:37:41AM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
> >>> Add the below four notifier events so drivers which are
On 03/12/2013 07:47 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-03-12 at 21:40 +0800, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 05:37:41AM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
>>> Add the below four notifier events so drivers which are interested in
>>> knowing the clock status can act accordingly.
On Tue, 2013-03-12 at 21:40 +0800, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 05:37:41AM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
> > Add the below four notifier events so drivers which are interested in
> > knowing the clock status can act accordingly. This is extremely useful
> > in some of the
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 05:37:41AM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
> Add the below four notifier events so drivers which are interested in
> knowing the clock status can act accordingly. This is extremely useful
> in some of the DVFS (Dynamic Voltage Frequency Scaling) design.
>
> PRE_CLK_ENABLE
>
Add the below four notifier events so drivers which are interested in
knowing the clock status can act accordingly. This is extremely useful
in some of the DVFS (Dynamic Voltage Frequency Scaling) design.
PRE_CLK_ENABLE
POST_CLK_ENABLE
PRE_CLK_DISABLE
POST_CLK_DISABLE
Signed-off-by: Bill Huang
Add the below four notifier events so drivers which are interested in
knowing the clock status can act accordingly. This is extremely useful
in some of the DVFS (Dynamic Voltage Frequency Scaling) design.
PRE_CLK_ENABLE
POST_CLK_ENABLE
PRE_CLK_DISABLE
POST_CLK_DISABLE
Signed-off-by: Bill Huang
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 05:37:41AM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
Add the below four notifier events so drivers which are interested in
knowing the clock status can act accordingly. This is extremely useful
in some of the DVFS (Dynamic Voltage Frequency Scaling) design.
PRE_CLK_ENABLE
On Tue, 2013-03-12 at 21:40 +0800, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 05:37:41AM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
Add the below four notifier events so drivers which are interested in
knowing the clock status can act accordingly. This is extremely useful
in some of the DVFS
On 03/12/2013 07:47 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
On Tue, 2013-03-12 at 21:40 +0800, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 05:37:41AM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
Add the below four notifier events so drivers which are interested in
knowing the clock status can act accordingly. This is
On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 12:42 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 03/12/2013 07:47 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
On Tue, 2013-03-12 at 21:40 +0800, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 05:37:41AM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
Add the below four notifier events so drivers which are
On 03/12/2013 11:08 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 12:42 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 03/12/2013 07:47 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
On Tue, 2013-03-12 at 21:40 +0800, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 05:37:41AM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
Add the below four
On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 13:24 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 03/12/2013 11:08 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 12:42 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 03/12/2013 07:47 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
On Tue, 2013-03-12 at 21:40 +0800, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at
60 matches
Mail list logo
