From: Thara Gopinath
Voltage control on TWL can be done using VMODE/I2C1/I2C_SR.
Since almost all platforms use I2C_SR on omap3, omap3_twl_init by
default expects that OMAP's I2C_SR is plugged in to TWL's I2C
and calls omap3_twl_set_sr_bit. On platforms where I2C_SR is not connected,
the board fi
From: Thara Gopinath
Voltage control on TWL can be done using VMODE/I2C1/I2C_SR.
Since almost all platforms use I2C_SR on omap3, omap3_twl_init by
default expects that OMAP's I2C_SR is plugged in to TWL's I2C
and calls omap3_twl_set_sr_bit. On platforms where I2C_SR is not connected,
the board fi
11 8:47 PM
>> To: Shweta Gulati
>> Cc: Nishanth Menon; Thara Gopinath; linux-omap@vger.kernel.org;
>> linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH V4] OMAP3: PM: Set/clear T2 bit for Smartreflex on
>> TWL
>>
>> On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 13:28:58 +0530
&g
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 8:59 PM, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 17:16:52 +0200
> Jarkko Nikula wrote:
>
>> Would it make more sense to set only the flag here and do the register
>> writes when omap3_twl_init is executing? Then it's not so strict when
>> the board code calls this funct
On Wed, 16 Feb 2011 11:22:09 +0530
"Gulati, Shweta" wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 8:59 PM, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> > Probably discussed earlier but would it make more sense to have flag in
> > struct twl4030_platform_data and to do registers writes in twl-core?
> > Looks suspicious to have i2c
Jarkko,
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 5:15 PM, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Feb 2011 11:22:09 +0530
> "Gulati, Shweta" wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 8:59 PM, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
>> > Probably discussed earlier but would it make more sense to have flag in
>> > struct twl4030_platform_data
On Wed, 16 Feb 2011 17:24:30 +0530
"Gulati, Shweta" wrote:
> > Note proof of concept patch only. I omitted the comments and don't do
> > explicit SR disable and I'd clean up the error paths in twl4030_power_init
> > a bit before this (e.g. printing error codes). Not sure either is the
> > twl4030
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 6:01 PM, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Feb 2011 17:24:30 +0530
> "Gulati, Shweta" wrote:
>
>> > Note proof of concept patch only. I omitted the comments and don't do
>> > explicit SR disable and I'd clean up the error paths in twl4030_power_init
>> > a bit before
Shweta Gulati writes:
> From: Thara Gopinath
>
> Voltage control on TWL can be done using VMODE/I2C1/I2C_SR.
> Since almost all platforms use I2C_SR on omap3, omap3_twl_init by
> default expects that OMAP's I2C_SR is plugged in to TWL's I2C
> and calls omap3_twl_set_sr_bit. On platforms where I2
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 11:17, Shweta Gulati wrote:
> From: Thara Gopinath
>
Gentle ping - folks after 8 days no comments, does this rev address
all previous comments? if so, it might be good to get some acks ;)
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
> Voltage control on TWL can be done using VMODE/I2C1/I2C_
Shweta Gulati writes:
> From: Thara Gopinath
>
> Voltage control on TWL can be done using VMODE/I2C1/I2C_SR.
> Since almost all platforms use I2C_SR on omap3, omap3_twl_init by
> default expects that OMAP's I2C_SR is plugged in to TWL's I2C
> and calls omap3_twl_set_sr_bit. On platforms where I2
"Menon, Nishanth" writes:
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 11:17, Shweta Gulati wrote:
>> From: Thara Gopinath
>>
> Gentle ping - folks after 8 days no comments, does this rev address
> all previous comments? if so, it might be good to get some acks ;)
Gentle reminder. Patchwork[1] keeps a queue of p
On Mon, 2011-02-14 at 14:24 -0800, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Shweta Gulati writes:
>
> > From: Thara Gopinath
> >
> > Voltage control on TWL can be done using VMODE/I2C1/I2C_SR.
> > Since almost all platforms use I2C_SR on omap3, omap3_twl_init by
> > default expects that OMAP's I2C_SR is plugged in
Kevin Hilman writes:
> Shweta Gulati writes:
>
>> From: Thara Gopinath
>>
>> Voltage control on TWL can be done using VMODE/I2C1/I2C_SR.
>> Since almost all platforms use I2C_SR on omap3, omap3_twl_init by
>> default expects that OMAP's I2C_SR is plugged in to TWL's I2C
>> and calls omap3_twl_s
Kevin Hilman wrote, on 02/15/2011 03:54 AM:
"Menon, Nishanth" writes:
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 11:17, Shweta Gulati wrote:
From: Thara Gopinath
Gentle ping - folks after 8 days no comments, does this rev address
all previous comments? if so, it might be good to get some acks ;)
Gentle remi
On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 13:28:58 +0530
Shweta Gulati wrote:
> This patch is based on LO PM Branch and Smartreflex has been
> tested on OMAP3430 SDP, OMAP3630 SDP and boot tested on
> OMAP2430 SDP.
>
I saw this was working on N900 (kind of special instrumentation
setup) after enabling /sys/kernel/deb
On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 17:16:52 +0200
Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> Would it make more sense to set only the flag here and do the register
> writes when omap3_twl_init is executing? Then it's not so strict when
> the board code calls this function.
>
Probably discussed earlier but would it make more sense
ap@vger.kernel.org;
> linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH V4] OMAP3: PM: Set/clear T2 bit for Smartreflex on
> TWL
>
> On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 13:28:58 +0530
> Shweta Gulati wrote:
>
> > This patch is based on LO PM Branch and Smartreflex has been
>
18 matches
Mail list logo
