On 03/18/2014 08:35 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
Hi Suman,
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:46 AM, Suman Anna s-a...@ti.com wrote:
So far, we have not come across multiple controllers. I see your point,
and I think this also depends on the semantics of how you exchange the
lock id number. The
Hi Suman,
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:46 AM, Suman Anna s-a...@ti.com wrote:
So far, we have not come across multiple controllers. I see your point,
and I think this also depends on the semantics of how you exchange the
lock id number. The agreement at the moment is on base_ids across
multiple
Hi Suman,
On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 1:58 AM, Suman Anna s-a...@ti.com wrote:
The series doesn't change the semantics of hwspinlock registration or adds a
new OF controller registration function. Implementations would still need to
register a controller using a base_id and number of locks. The
Hi Ohad,
On 03/17/2014 09:23 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
Hi Suman,
On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 1:58 AM, Suman Anna s-a...@ti.com wrote:
The series doesn't change the semantics of hwspinlock registration or adds a
new OF controller registration function. Implementations would still need to
register
Hi Suman,
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 9:10 PM, Suman Anna s-a...@ti.com wrote:
base_id would be a property (if added) of the hwspinlock controller node,
and from DT perspective, we will be using the phandle for the controller
anyway. So, using a base_id+specifier seems redundant, as the specifier
Hi Ohad,
On 03/17/2014 02:47 PM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
Hi Suman,
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 9:10 PM, Suman Anna s-a...@ti.com wrote:
base_id would be a property (if added) of the hwspinlock controller node,
and from DT perspective, we will be using the phandle for the controller
anyway. So,
Hi Suman, Mark,
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 8:14 PM, Suman Anna s-a...@ti.com wrote:
Mark, Ohad,
...
Gentle reminder, can you provide your acks/comments?
Sorry for the late jump in.
I have a few comments:
- Hardware spinlocks must have global and system-wide id numbers;
these numbers cannot be
Hi Ohad,
On 03/14/2014 03:10 PM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
Hi Suman, Mark,
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 8:14 PM, Suman Anna s-a...@ti.com wrote:
Mark, Ohad,
...
Gentle reminder, can you provide your acks/comments?
Sorry for the late jump in.
I have a few comments:
Thanks for the comments. It
Mark, Ohad,
On 02/10/2014 01:27 PM, Suman Anna wrote:
Mark,
On 01/13/2014 06:19 PM, Suman Anna wrote:
Hi,
This is an updated series mainly addressing Mark Rutland's comments
about hwlock specifier being always one-cell. The series adds the
support for #hwlock-cells property and adds a simple
Mark,
On 01/13/2014 06:19 PM, Suman Anna wrote:
Hi,
This is an updated series mainly addressing Mark Rutland's comments
about hwlock specifier being always one-cell. The series adds the
support for #hwlock-cells property and adds a simple default OF
translate function.
The DTS patches from
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 06:19:17PM -0600, Suman Anna wrote:
This is an updated series mainly addressing Mark Rutland's comments
about hwlock specifier being always one-cell. The series adds the
support for #hwlock-cells property and adds a simple default OF
translate function.
The DTS
Hi,
This is an updated series mainly addressing Mark Rutland's comments
about hwlock specifier being always one-cell. The series adds the
support for #hwlock-cells property and adds a simple default OF
translate function.
The DTS patches from previous series have already been merged, and
needs
12 matches
Mail list logo
