Alen,
On Saturday 27 August 2011 12:06 AM, Alan Stern wrote:
On Fri, 26 Aug 2011, Govindraj.R wrote:
Hello,
During system_wide_suspend pm runtime is disabled.
I.e. __pm_runtime_disable is called from __device_suspend.
Now, if a wakeup interrupt is triggered and the wakeup device irq handler
-Original Message-
From: Kevin Hilman [mailto:khil...@ti.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 27, 2011 4:55 AM
To: Menon, Nishanth
Cc: Tero Kristo; linux-omap@vger.kernel.org; Vishwanath Sripathy
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/2] OMAP3+: voltage / oscillator parameter
segregation
Hi Nishanth,
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 4:27 PM, Tomi Valkeinen tomi.valkei...@ti.com wrote:
Currently omapfb wants that all the display devices have a driver,
otherwise omapfb refuses to start. There's no real requirement to act
like that, and this patch will make omapfb give a warning and skip that
device.
The commit 383e4f69879d11c86ebdd38b3356f6d0690fb4cc makes reqbuf and mmap
prevent
requesting a larger size buffer than what is allocated at kernel boot during
omap_vout_probe.
The requested size is comapred with vout-buffer_size, this isn't correct as
vout-buffer_size is later set to the size
On Sat, 27 Aug 2011, Santosh wrote:
I might be wrong here, but after discussion with Govindraj on this
issue, it seems there is a flaw in the way OMAP chain handler
handling the child interrupts.
On OMAP, we have special interrupt wakeup source at PRCM level and
many devices can trigger
From: Ming Lei ming@canonical.com
This patch fixs one performance bug on ARM Cortex A9 dual core platform,
which has been reported on quite a few ARM machines(OMAP4, Tegra 2,
snowball...),
see details from link of https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/709245.
In fact, one mb() on ARM is enough to
From: Ming Lei ming@canonical.com
This patch fixs one performance bug on ARM Cortex A9 dual core platform,
which has been reported on quite a few ARM machines(OMAP4, Tegra 2,
snowball...),
see details from link of https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/709245.
In fact, one mb() on ARM is enough to
On Saturday 27 August 2011 07:31 PM, Alan Stern wrote:
On Sat, 27 Aug 2011, Santosh wrote:
I might be wrong here, but after discussion with Govindraj on this
issue, it seems there is a flaw in the way OMAP chain handler
handling the child interrupts.
On OMAP, we have special interrupt wakeup
Hi,
On Saturday 27 August 2011 08:18 PM, ming@canonical.com wrote:
From: Ming Leiming@canonical.com
This patch fixs one performance bug on ARM Cortex A9 dual core platform,
which has been reported on quite a few ARM machines(OMAP4, Tegra 2,
snowball...),
see details from link of
On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 10:48:35PM +0800, ming@canonical.com wrote:
From: Ming Lei ming@canonical.com
This patch fixs one performance bug on ARM Cortex A9 dual core platform,
which has been reported on quite a few ARM machines(OMAP4, Tegra 2,
snowball...),
see details from link of
On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 11:03 PM, Santosh santosh.shilim...@ti.com wrote:
Hi,
On Saturday 27 August 2011 08:18 PM, ming@canonical.com wrote:
From: Ming Leiming@canonical.com
This patch fixs one performance bug on ARM Cortex A9 dual core platform,
which has been reported on quite a
Hi,
On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 11:13 PM, Greg KH g...@kroah.com wrote:
On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 10:48:35PM +0800, ming@canonical.com wrote:
From: Ming Lei ming@canonical.com
This patch fixs one performance bug on ARM Cortex A9 dual core platform,
which has been reported on quite a few
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 05:41:29PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Friday 26 August 2011, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Friday 26 August 2011, David Gibson wrote:
If you open code it this way then yes, it's silly. But what about
something like this:
static struct of_device_id
On Saturday 27 August 2011 08:48 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 11:03 PM, Santoshsantosh.shilim...@ti.com wrote:
Hi,
On Saturday 27 August 2011 08:18 PM, ming@canonical.com wrote:
From: Ming Leiming@canonical.com
This patch fixs one performance bug on ARM Cortex A9
On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 11:33:26PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 11:13 PM, Greg KH g...@kroah.com wrote:
On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 10:48:35PM +0800, ming@canonical.com wrote:
From: Ming Lei ming@canonical.com
This patch fixs one performance bug on ARM Cortex
Hello.
On 27-08-2011 18:48, ming@canonical.com wrote:
From: Ming Leiming@canonical.com
This patch fixs one performance bug on ARM Cortex A9 dual core platform,
which has been reported on quite a few ARM machines(OMAP4, Tegra 2,
snowball...),
see details from link of
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 9:46 PM, Guenter Roeck
guenter.ro...@ericsson.com wrote:
On Fri, 2011-08-26 at 07:17 -0400, J, KEERTHY wrote:
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 9:26 PM, Guenter Roeck
guenter.ro...@ericsson.com wrote:
On Thu, 2011-08-25 at 10:06 -0400, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011
Hi,
Thanks for your comment.
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 12:07 AM, Greg KH g...@kroah.com wrote:
As Santosh pointed out, mb on ARM will flush L2 write buffer. The
description here is wrong.
Then this can't be accepted as-is :)
Yes, I will update it in v1, :-)
I think the below should make
Hi,
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 12:57 AM, Ming Lei ming@canonical.com wrote:
Are you sure? Have you read the documentation about memory barriers to
confirm this?
I read the doc again, :-), and it mentions few about mb/wmb/rmb, I think
my above description is still not correct. Generally
On Sunday 28 August 2011 00:37:36 David Gibson wrote:
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 05:41:29PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Friday 26 August 2011, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Friday 26 August 2011, David Gibson wrote:
If you open code it this way then yes, it's silly. But what about
On Sat, 27 Aug 2011, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
Right, and I guess we can simply ignore DMA and ioport resources because
they are extremely rare, right?
DMA resources are quite widely used.
For example, looking at the SoCs with some publicly-available
documentation, the Motorola i.MX51 reference
On Sat, 27 Aug 2011, Santosh wrote:
On Saturday 27 August 2011 07:31 PM, Alan Stern wrote:
On Sat, 27 Aug 2011, Santosh wrote:
I might be wrong here, but after discussion with Govindraj on this
issue, it seems there is a flaw in the way OMAP chain handler
handling the child interrupts.
On Fri, 26 Aug 2011, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
I don't think anyone was talking about converting driver /to/ the
_byname method
For drivers that use multiple resources of the same type, converting those
to use platform_get_resource_byname() does indeed seem appropriate.
By the way, the same IP
On Sun, 28 Aug 2011, Ming Lei wrote:
I read the doc again, :-), and it mentions few about mb/wmb/rmb, I think
my above description is still not correct. Generally speaking, mb only
means there is a order between two accesses.
Now I think only one mb() after 'dummy-hw_token = token;' is
On Sun, 28 Aug 2011, Ming Lei wrote:
Looks like there is still another similar problem in qh_link_async():
the last wmb
should be changed into mb, because HC will read 'head-hw-hw_next' from qh
descriptor and this pointer in qh is read only for HC. But this problem can't
be
observed on
On Fri, 26 Aug 2011, David Gibson wrote:
static struct of_device_id foodevice_of_match[] __devinitdata = {
{ .compatible = foocorp,foodevice1234,
.resource_names = {base_regs, extra_regs, }, },
{ .compatible = foocorp,foodevice1239,
.resource_names = {base_regs,
Beloved,I am Deborah Mannings.I write this email to you on my sick bed
facing death.I have a substantial sum I would like you to help me
distribute to the needy and helpless.God bless you as you reply through
mann_...@yahoo.cn
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-omap
Hi,
Thanks for your comment.
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 4:06 AM, Alan Stern st...@rowland.harvard.edu wrote:
On Sun, 28 Aug 2011, Ming Lei wrote:
I read the doc again, :-), and it mentions few about mb/wmb/rmb, I think
my above description is still not correct. Generally speaking, mb only
Hi,
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 4:11 AM, Alan Stern st...@rowland.harvard.edu wrote:
On Sun, 28 Aug 2011, Ming Lei wrote:
Looks like there is still another similar problem in qh_link_async():
the last wmb
should be changed into mb, because HC will read 'head-hw-hw_next' from qh
descriptor and
29 matches
Mail list logo
