On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 05:52:54PM +, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
> On 19/03/15 17:38, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 19/03/15 17:32, Mark Rutland wrote:
> >> One more thing:
> >>
> >>> @@ -883,7 +894,11 @@ static inline const struct cci_pmu_model
> >>> *get_cci_model(struct platform_device *
On 19/03/15 17:38, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 19/03/15 17:32, Mark Rutland wrote:
One more thing:
@@ -883,7 +894,11 @@ static inline const struct cci_pmu_model
*get_cci_model(struct platform_device *
pdev->dev.of_node);
if (!match)
On 19/03/15 17:32, Mark Rutland wrote:
One more thing:
@@ -883,7 +894,11 @@ static inline const struct cci_pmu_model
*get_cci_model(struct platform_device *
pdev->dev.of_node);
if (!match)
return NULL;
+ if
One more thing:
> @@ -883,7 +894,11 @@ static inline const struct cci_pmu_model
> *get_cci_model(struct platform_device *
> pdev->dev.of_node);
> if (!match)
> return NULL;
> + if (match->data)
> + return ma
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 09:51:41AM +, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
> From: "Suzuki K. Poulose"
>
> A minor change, fixed missplled 'DEPRECATED' in the dev_warn().
>
> Thanks
> Suzuki
>
> 8>
> Avoid secure transactions while probing the CCI PMU. The
> existing code makes use of the Perip
From: "Suzuki K. Poulose"
A minor change, fixed missplled 'DEPRECATED' in the dev_warn().
Thanks
Suzuki
8>
Avoid secure transactions while probing the CCI PMU. The
existing code makes use of the Peripheral ID2 (PID2) register
to determine the revision of the CCI400, which requires a
sec
6 matches
Mail list logo