On Friday 30 March 2012 05:30 PM, Cousson, Benoit wrote:
> On 3/30/2012 1:20 PM, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
[..]
> Playing with clock domain state from the driver is just not acceptable.
>
Sorry for small digration but the clock-domain/power domain APIs
were coming in between CPUIDLE code movemen
On Fri, 2012-03-30 at 14:02 +0200, Cousson, Benoit wrote:
> On 3/30/2012 1:59 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-03-30 at 16:50 +0530, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
> >
> >> Exactly. That's what I mean. You tweak sysconfig or clockdomain,
> >> both are messy.
> >>
> >> if one need to choose bet
On 3/30/2012 1:20 PM, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 4:47 PM, Archit Taneja wrote:
On Friday 30 March 2012 04:34 PM, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Archit Tanejawrote:
On Friday 30 March 2012 03:59 PM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
On Friday
On 3/30/2012 1:59 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On Fri, 2012-03-30 at 16:50 +0530, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
Exactly. That's what I mean. You tweak sysconfig or clockdomain,
both are messy.
if one need to choose between two bad options, I guess sysconifig
one is better because that is local to IPs
On Fri, 2012-03-30 at 16:50 +0530, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
> Exactly. That's what I mean. You tweak sysconfig or clockdomain,
> both are messy.
>
> if one need to choose between two bad options, I guess sysconifig
> one is better because that is local to IPs and there is some way today
> for dr
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 4:47 PM, Archit Taneja wrote:
> On Friday 30 March 2012 04:34 PM, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Archit Taneja wrote:
>>>
>>> On Friday 30 March 2012 03:59 PM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
On Friday 30 March 2012 03:53 PM, Couss
On Friday 30 March 2012 04:34 PM, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Archit Taneja wrote:
On Friday 30 March 2012 03:59 PM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
On Friday 30 March 2012 03:53 PM, Cousson, Benoit wrote:
On 3/30/2012 10:44 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
On Friday 3
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Archit Taneja wrote:
> On Friday 30 March 2012 03:59 PM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>>
>> On Friday 30 March 2012 03:53 PM, Cousson, Benoit wrote:
>>>
>>> On 3/30/2012 10:44 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
On Friday 30 March 2012 02:04 PM, Archit Taneja wrote:
On Friday 30 March 2012 03:59 PM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
On Friday 30 March 2012 03:53 PM, Cousson, Benoit wrote:
On 3/30/2012 10:44 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
On Friday 30 March 2012 02:04 PM, Archit Taneja wrote:
On Friday 30 March 2012 02:01 PM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
+ Kevin
On Fri
On Friday 30 March 2012 03:53 PM, Cousson, Benoit wrote:
> On 3/30/2012 10:44 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>> On Friday 30 March 2012 02:04 PM, Archit Taneja wrote:
>>> On Friday 30 March 2012 02:01 PM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
+ Kevin
On Friday 30 March 2012 01:56 PM, Tomi Valkeinen
On 3/30/2012 10:44 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
On Friday 30 March 2012 02:04 PM, Archit Taneja wrote:
On Friday 30 March 2012 02:01 PM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
+ Kevin
On Friday 30 March 2012 01:56 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On Fri, 2012-03-30 at 13:51 +0530, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
On Fr
On 3/30/2012 10:26 AM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On Fri, 2012-03-30 at 13:51 +0530, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
All OMAP4 versions seem to be affected. I couldn't find a mention about
this in the mainline kernel. Any ideas how and where this s
On Friday 30 March 2012 02:04 PM, Archit Taneja wrote:
> On Friday 30 March 2012 02:01 PM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>> + Kevin
>>
>> On Friday 30 March 2012 01:56 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2012-03-30 at 13:51 +0530, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Tomi
>>
On Friday 30 March 2012 02:01 PM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
+ Kevin
On Friday 30 March 2012 01:56 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On Fri, 2012-03-30 at 13:51 +0530, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
All OMAP4 versions seem to be affected. I couldn't
+ Kevin
On Friday 30 March 2012 01:56 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-03-30 at 13:51 +0530, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Tomi Valkeinen
>> wrote:
>
>>> All OMAP4 versions seem to be affected. I couldn't find a mention about
>>> this in the mainline kern
On Fri, 2012-03-30 at 13:51 +0530, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> > All OMAP4 versions seem to be affected. I couldn't find a mention about
> > this in the mainline kernel. Any ideas how and where this should be
> > fixed?
> >
> It's not patch
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just found out about OMAP4 errata i740:
>
> DESCRIPTION
> A bug has been identified in the interconnect agent handling the
> connect-disconnect protocol between an
> initiator and interconnect. When
Hi,
I just found out about OMAP4 errata i740:
DESCRIPTION
A bug has been identified in the interconnect agent handling the
connect-disconnect protocol between an
initiator and interconnect. When the disconnect protocol violation occurs,
there is a dead lock and a
system lockup is observed
18 matches
Mail list logo
