On Sunday 11 May 2014 18:47:28 Olof Johansson wrote:
> > > Also for platsmp.c and pm.c I can think of following approaches
> > > 1: Keep these macros till we get generic solution?
> > > 2: Allow chipid driver to expose APIs to check SoC id and SoC revisions
> > > till we get
> > > generic solution
(Taking the discussion here since Panjak pointed me to this thread when
I commented on the latest patch set)
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 04:58:14PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Monday 05 May 2014 18:23:55 Pankaj Dubey wrote:
> > On 05/04/2014 12:02 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > Ideally this shoul
On Tuesday 06 May 2014 15:57:24 Pankaj Dubey wrote:
> On 05/05/2014 11:58 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Monday 05 May 2014 18:23:55 Pankaj Dubey wrote:
> >> On 05/04/2014 12:02 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >>> Ideally this should be done by slightly restructuring the DT
> >>> source to make all on-
On Monday 05 May 2014 10:34:02 Rob Herring wrote:
>
> > Ideally this should be done by slightly restructuring the DT
> > source to make all on-chip devices appear below the soc node.
> > We'd have to think a bit about how to best do this while
> > preserving compatibility with existing dts files.
On 05/05/2014 11:58 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Monday 05 May 2014 18:23:55 Pankaj Dubey wrote:
On 05/04/2014 12:02 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
Ideally this should be done by slightly restructuring the DT
source to make all on-chip devices appear below the soc node.
Currently I can't see soc node
On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 10:02 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Saturday 03 May 2014 15:11:36 Pankaj Dubey wrote:
>> This patch series attempts to get rid of soc_is_exynos macros
>> and eventually with the help of this series we can probably get
>> rid of CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS in near future.
>> Ea
On Monday 05 May 2014 16:58:14 Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > Also for platsmp.c and pm.c I can think of following approaches
> > 1: Keep these macros till we get generic solution?
> > 2: Allow chipid driver to expose APIs to check SoC id and SoC revisions
> > till we get
> > generic solution. So that a
On Monday 05 May 2014 18:23:55 Pankaj Dubey wrote:
> On 05/04/2014 12:02 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > Ideally this should be done by slightly restructuring the DT
> > source to make all on-chip devices appear below the soc node.
>
> Currently I can't see soc nodes in exynos4 and exynos5 DT files.
Hi Arnd,
Thanks for review and suggestions.
On 05/04/2014 12:02 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Saturday 03 May 2014 15:11:36 Pankaj Dubey wrote:
This patch series attempts to get rid of soc_is_exynos macros
and eventually with the help of this series we can probably get
rid of CONFIG_SOC_EXYN
On Saturday 03 May 2014 15:11:36 Pankaj Dubey wrote:
> This patch series attempts to get rid of soc_is_exynos macros
> and eventually with the help of this series we can probably get
> rid of CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS in near future.
> Each Exynos SoC has ChipID block which can give information abo
This patch series attempts to get rid of soc_is_exynos macros
and eventually with the help of this series we can probably get
rid of CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS in near future.
Each Exynos SoC has ChipID block which can give information about
SoC's product Id and revision number. Currently we have si
11 matches
Mail list logo
