Re: [PATCH 0/3] OMAP: PM: enable UART clock disabling when idle

2008-11-29 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 2:29 AM, Kevin Hilman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This series enables UART clock disabling after an inactivity period. It is based on top of the 2 8250 patches recently sent to linux-serial and CC'd to linux-omap. To enable: # echo 1 /sys/power/clocks_off_while_idle

RE: [PATCH 0/3] OMAP: PM: enable UART clock disabling when idle

2008-11-29 Thread Woodruff, Richard
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:linux-omap- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Felipe Contreras Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2008 6:52 AM On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 2:29 AM, Kevin Hilman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This series enables UART clock disabling after an inactivity period. It is based

Re: v4l2_device/v4l2_subdev: please review (PATCH 1/3)

2008-11-29 Thread Hans Verkuil
Hi Laurent, Let me start by thanking you for reviewing this! Much appreciated. On Saturday 29 November 2008 00:34:44 Laurent Pinchart wrote: Hi Hans, On Tuesday 25 November 2008, Hans Verkuil wrote: As requested, the patches as separate posts for review. Hans # HG changeset

RE: [PATCH 0/3] OMAP: PM: enable UART clock disabling when idle

2008-11-29 Thread Igor Stoppa
On Sat, 2008-11-29 at 07:55 -0600, ext Woodruff, Richard wrote: Not unless you use some kind of flow control or protocol retransmits. What about bitbanging the entire first character? -- Cheers, Igor --- Igor Stoppa Maemo Software - Nokia Devices RD - Helsinki -- To unsubscribe from this

[PATCH v2] v4l2_device/v4l2_subdev: final (?) version

2008-11-29 Thread Hans Verkuil
Hi all, This is hopefully the final version. All earlier comments have been incorporated into this patch. I also made a new change: the mutex has been replaced by a spinlock and I no longer lock when walking the list of subdevs. So the assumption is that subdevs only added during initialization

Re: v4l2_device/v4l2_subdev: please review (PATCH 1/3)

2008-11-29 Thread Guennadi Liakhovetski
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008, Hans Verkuil wrote: +Introduction + + +The V4L2 drivers tend to be very complex due to the complexity of the +hardware: most devices have multiple ICs, export multiple device nodes in +/dev, and create also non-V4L2 devices such as DVB, ALSA,

Re: v4l2_device/v4l2_subdev: please review (PATCH 1/3)

2008-11-29 Thread David Brownell
On Saturday 29 November 2008, Hans Verkuil wrote: +And this to go from an i2c_client to a v4l2_subdev struct: + +   struct v4l2_subdev *sd = i2c_get_clientdata(client); + +Finally you need to make a command function to make +driver-command() call the right subdev_ops functions:

Re: [PATCH v2] v4l2_device/v4l2_subdev: final (?) version

2008-11-29 Thread David Brownell
On Saturday 29 November 2008, Hans Verkuil wrote: +void v4l2_device_register(struct device *dev, struct v4l2_device *v4l2_dev) +{ +   BUG_ON(!dev || !v4l2_dev || dev_get_drvdata(dev)); Ouch. Better to return -EINVAL, like most register() calls, than *ever* use a BUG_ON() for bad

Re: [PATCH v2] v4l2_device/v4l2_subdev: final (?) version

2008-11-29 Thread Hans Verkuil
On Saturday 29 November 2008 21:20:47 David Brownell wrote: On Saturday 29 November 2008, Hans Verkuil wrote: +void v4l2_device_register(struct device *dev, struct v4l2_device *v4l2_dev) +{ +   BUG_ON(!dev || !v4l2_dev || dev_get_drvdata(dev)); Ouch. Better to return -EINVAL, like

Re: [PATCH v2] v4l2_device/v4l2_subdev: final (?) version

2008-11-29 Thread Hans Verkuil
On Saturday 29 November 2008 23:22:19 David Brownell wrote: On Saturday 29 November 2008, Hans Verkuil wrote: +void v4l2_device_register(struct device *dev, struct v4l2_device *v4l2_dev) +{ +   BUG_ON(!dev || !v4l2_dev || dev_get_drvdata(dev)); Ouch.  Better to return

Re: [PATCH v2] v4l2_device/v4l2_subdev: final (?) version

2008-11-29 Thread Hans Verkuil
On Sunday 30 November 2008 00:31:38 Andy Walls wrote: On Sat, 2008-11-29 at 18:52 +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote: Hi all, This is hopefully the final version. All earlier comments have been incorporated into this patch. I also made a new change: the mutex has been replaced by a spinlock and

Re: [PATCH v2] v4l2_device/v4l2_subdev: final (?) version

2008-11-29 Thread Andy Walls
On Sun, 2008-11-30 at 01:40 +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote: On Sunday 30 November 2008 00:31:38 Andy Walls wrote: On Sat, 2008-11-29 at 18:52 +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote: Hi all, This is hopefully the final version. All earlier comments have been incorporated into this patch. I also made a

Re: [PATCH v2] v4l2_device/v4l2_subdev: final (?) version

2008-11-29 Thread David Brownell
On Saturday 29 November 2008, Hans Verkuil wrote: Are there some documented guidelines on when to use BUG_ON? Maybe there should be.  I know I've seen flames from Linus on the topic.  Basically, treat it like a panic() where the system must stop operation lest it catch fire or scribble

RE: [PATCH 0/3] OMAP: PM: enable UART clock disabling when idle

2008-11-29 Thread Woodruff, Richard
From: Igor Stoppa [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2008 10:07 AM On Sat, 2008-11-29 at 07:55 -0600, ext Woodruff, Richard wrote: Not unless you use some kind of flow control or protocol retransmits. What about bitbanging the entire first character? Huh? Typically

Re: [PATCH 0/5] extra module resets to ensure full-chip idle

2008-11-29 Thread Kevin Hilman
Koen Kooi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Op 27 nov 2008, om 01:05 heeft Kevin Hilman het volgende geschreven: Various bootloaders have been known to leave modules in a state which prevents full-chip retention. This series forces MMC, IVA2 and D2D/modem into known reset/idle states so that the