Paul,
On 08/20/2013 06:39 PM, Paul Walmsley wrote:
Hi
a few comments
On Wed, 14 Aug 2013, Suman Anna wrote:
The remoteproc infrastructure is currently tied closely with the
virtio/rpmsg framework, and the boot requires that there are virtio
devices present in the resource table from
Hi
a few comments
On Wed, 14 Aug 2013, Suman Anna wrote:
The remoteproc infrastructure is currently tied closely with the
virtio/rpmsg framework, and the boot requires that there are virtio
devices present in the resource table from the firmware image.
Using static channels is something
Kevin, Santosh, Dave, Russ,
On 08/13/2013 02:11 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
Russ Dill russ.d...@gmail.com writes:
ARM world is also moving towards that by standardizing some of these
through (read PSCI) and thats the way to go in general.
Agreed, but I'm not sure (yet) about enforcing PSCI on
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Suman Anna s-a...@ti.com wrote:
Kevin, Santosh, Dave, Russ,
On 08/13/2013 02:11 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
Russ Dill russ.d...@gmail.com writes:
ARM world is also moving towards that by standardizing some of these
through (read PSCI) and thats the way to go in
Dave Gerlach d-gerl...@ti.com writes:
On 08/12/2013 02:17 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
Dave Gerlach d-gerl...@ti.com writes:
On 08/09/2013 12:11 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Dave Gerlach d-gerl...@ti.com [130808 09:23]:
On 08/08/2013 08:44 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
Lets address the above
On Tuesday 13 August 2013 10:29 AM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
Dave Gerlach d-gerl...@ti.com writes:
On 08/12/2013 02:17 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
Dave Gerlach d-gerl...@ti.com writes:
On 08/09/2013 12:11 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Dave Gerlach d-gerl...@ti.com [130808 09:23]:
On 08/08/2013 08:44
+ Ohad
Santosh Shilimkar santosh.shilim...@ti.com writes:
On Tuesday 13 August 2013 10:29 AM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
Dave Gerlach d-gerl...@ti.com writes:
On 08/12/2013 02:17 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
Dave Gerlach d-gerl...@ti.com writes:
On 08/09/2013 12:11 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Dave
On Tuesday 13 August 2013 12:19 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
+ Ohad
Santosh Shilimkar santosh.shilim...@ti.com writes:
On Tuesday 13 August 2013 10:29 AM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
Dave Gerlach d-gerl...@ti.com writes:
On 08/12/2013 02:17 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
Dave Gerlach d-gerl...@ti.com
ARM world is also moving towards that by standardizing some of these
through (read PSCI) and thats the way to go in general.
Agreed, but I'm not sure (yet) about enforcing PSCI on legacy platforms
that don't support it natively. Are you saying that the AM33xx firmware
should be converted to
On Tuesday 13 August 2013 02:30 PM, Russ Dill wrote:
ARM world is also moving towards that by standardizing some of these
through (read PSCI) and thats the way to go in general.
Agreed, but I'm not sure (yet) about enforcing PSCI on legacy platforms
that don't support it natively. Are you
Russ Dill russ.d...@gmail.com writes:
ARM world is also moving towards that by standardizing some of these
through (read PSCI) and thats the way to go in general.
Agreed, but I'm not sure (yet) about enforcing PSCI on legacy platforms
that don't support it natively. Are you saying that the
* Dave Gerlach d-gerl...@ti.com [130809 14:02]:
Ok I will go ahead and pull the control module code that handles IPC
into the wkup_m3 driver. The wkup_m3.c file is still present in
mach-omap2 as the right location for it wasn't decided in the last
RFC. Any thoughts on a good location for it?
Dave Gerlach d-gerl...@ti.com writes:
On 08/09/2013 12:11 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Dave Gerlach d-gerl...@ti.com [130808 09:23]:
On 08/08/2013 08:44 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
Lets address the above better. I don't see a need of 8 functions
exported doing one or 2 register writes.
Look
On 08/12/2013 02:17 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
Dave Gerlach d-gerl...@ti.com writes:
On 08/09/2013 12:11 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Dave Gerlach d-gerl...@ti.com [130808 09:23]:
On 08/08/2013 08:44 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
Lets address the above better. I don't see a need of 8 functions
On 08/09/2013 12:11 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Dave Gerlach d-gerl...@ti.com [130808 09:23]:
On 08/08/2013 08:44 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
Lets address the above better. I don't see a need of 8 functions
exported doing one or 2 register writes.
Look M3 based handling is going to be there
On Tuesday 06 August 2013 01:49 PM, Dave Gerlach wrote:
From: Vaibhav Bedia vaibhav.be...@ti.com
Interacting with WKUP-M3 requires some more control
module register writes. Add the register offsets and
APIs to write to these.
Signed-off-by: Vaibhav Bedia vaibhav.be...@ti.com
On 08/08/2013 08:44 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
On Tuesday 06 August 2013 01:49 PM, Dave Gerlach wrote:
From: Vaibhav Bedia vaibhav.be...@ti.com
Interacting with WKUP-M3 requires some more control
module register writes. Add the register offsets and
APIs to write to these.
Signed-off-by:
* Dave Gerlach d-gerl...@ti.com [130808 09:23]:
On 08/08/2013 08:44 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
Lets address the above better. I don't see a need of 8 functions
exported doing one or 2 register writes.
Look M3 based handling is going to be there on future SOCs
as well and this kind of
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 10:49 AM, Dave Gerlach d-gerl...@ti.com wrote:
From: Vaibhav Bedia vaibhav.be...@ti.com
Interacting with WKUP-M3 requires some more control
module register writes. Add the register offsets and
APIs to write to these.
Signed-off-by: Vaibhav Bedia vaibhav.be...@ti.com
19 matches
Mail list logo
