On Saturday 18 February 2012 01:51 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Rajendra Nayak [120217 05:53]:
Tony,
On Wednesday 15 February 2012 11:58 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
Hi all,
This series fixes up the issues noted by Russell on omap2_hsmmc_init()
where if TWL PMIC is compiled as a module we can't ke
* Tony Lindgren [120217 11:50]:
> * Rajendra Nayak [120217 05:53]:
> > Tony,
> >
> > On Wednesday 15 February 2012 11:58 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > >Hi all,
> > >
> > >This series fixes up the issues noted by Russell on omap2_hsmmc_init()
> > >where if TWL PMIC is compiled as a module we can't
* Russell King - ARM Linux [120217 00:43]:
>
> Tony: I think there's a bug here - if the gpio-twl4030 module is inserted,
> removed and re-inserted, I think we'll end up creating the devices for MMC
> twice with the same name, resulting in sysfs complaining very loudly.
I guess you mean without
* Rajendra Nayak [120217 05:53]:
> Tony,
>
> On Wednesday 15 February 2012 11:58 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> >Hi all,
> >
> >This series fixes up the issues noted by Russell on omap2_hsmmc_init()
> >where if TWL PMIC is compiled as a module we can't keep a bunch of
> >functions marked as __init li
Tony,
On Wednesday 15 February 2012 11:58 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
Hi all,
This series fixes up the issues noted by Russell on omap2_hsmmc_init()
where if TWL PMIC is compiled as a module we can't keep a bunch of
functions marked as __init like they should be. This series fixes
the issues by sp
On Friday 17 February 2012 03:48 PM, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
Yes, I did get a WARN saying the device is already registered. An
unregister in my teardown should fix that too.
And now I see there is no way to unregister an omap_device :-)
which needs to be added.
--
To unsubscribe from this list
On Friday 17 February 2012 03:36 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 03:29:55PM +0530, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
hmm, rmmod does not even seem to trigger the drivers .remove if there
are outstanding requests on the module, so a pdata->teardown called
from within the .remove d
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 03:29:55PM +0530, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
> hmm, rmmod does not even seem to trigger the drivers .remove if there
> are outstanding requests on the module, so a pdata->teardown called
> from within the .remove does not help to get the gpio_requests done
> from the board file c
On Friday 17 February 2012 03:03 PM, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
Sorry, I did'nt repond back because I wanted to get this resolved
completely before I did.
(3) did not probe the inserted mmc device because the driver was
doing a platform_driver_probe() and not a platform_driver_register().
Once I fix
On Friday 17 February 2012 03:03 PM, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
[]...
3. Load the gpio-twl4030 module
I was expecting this to now detect the card, but I instead got
this error which seems to tell gpio-twl4030 has problems
when built/used as a module, outside of the mmc issues.
Looks like I was mi
[]...
3. Load the gpio-twl4030 module
I was expecting this to now detect the card, but I instead got
this error which seems to tell gpio-twl4030 has problems
when built/used as a module, outside of the mmc issues.
Looks like I was mislead with the errors and though the twl4030
gpio probe was
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 01:51:51PM +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 06:45:50PM +0530, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
> > On Thursday 16 February 2012 06:04 PM, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
> >>> Can you test something with these patches?
> >>>
> >>> 1. Build the gpio-twl4030.c as a
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 06:45:50PM +0530, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
> On Thursday 16 February 2012 06:04 PM, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
>>> Can you test something with these patches?
>>>
>>> 1. Build the gpio-twl4030.c as a module, but with HSMMC support built in
>>> 2. Boot on the 4430SDP
>>
>> twl4030 gpi
On Thursday 16 February 2012 06:04 PM, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
Can you test something with these patches?
1. Build the gpio-twl4030.c as a module, but with HSMMC support built in
2. Boot on the 4430SDP
twl4030 gpio is used for card detect on OMAP3, so I tried this
on my Beagle instead of 4430SDP
On Thursday 16 February 2012 05:42 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 05:30:59PM +0530, Nayak, Rajendra wrote:
One more patch is needed to sort out the remaining issue with
omap4 that has yet another luck based initialization for the
same issue..
I did this patch on t
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 05:30:59PM +0530, Nayak, Rajendra wrote:
> > One more patch is needed to sort out the remaining issue with
> > omap4 that has yet another luck based initialization for the
> > same issue..
> >
>
> I did this patch on top of your series which should fix the
> issue on all om
> One more patch is needed to sort out the remaining issue with
> omap4 that has yet another luck based initialization for the
> same issue..
>
I did this patch on top of your series which should fix the
issue on all omap4 boards too. Tested on omap4panda and
omap4sdp boards.
>From 5a4bbd64fd1e79
Hi all,
This series fixes up the issues noted by Russell on omap2_hsmmc_init()
where if TWL PMIC is compiled as a module we can't keep a bunch of
functions marked as __init like they should be. This series fixes
the issues by splitting omap2_hsmmc_init() into two functions.
One more patch is need
18 matches
Mail list logo
