Hi Tomasz,

On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 2:52 AM, Tomasz Figa <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Abhilash,
>
> On 13.05.2014 14:01, Abhilash Kesavan wrote:
>> Rebased on
>> 1] Kukjin Kim's tree for-next branch (which has Sachin Kamat's SYSRAM
>> patches merged) with Tomasz Figa's samsung clock tree (samsung-next branch)
>> merged.
>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/kgene/linux-samsung.git/log/?h=for-next
>> 2] Pankaj Dubey's v4 PMU patchset
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/10/29
>
> I think this patch is not safe to base on yet. I need to find time to
> review the latest version and share my latest view on this with Pankaj,
> as I have a bit different design in mind.
OK, do you think the PMU series might make it this cycle or should I
drop this as a dependency and re-base my patches just on Daniel's
CPUIdle consolidation.

Regards,
Abhilash
>
> In general, I don't like the fact that you end up with using regmap to
> access registers that are used exclusively by PMU driver or for accesses
> happening at late suspend or early resume, where concurrent accesses
> from other drivers simply can't occur.

>
> Best regards,
> Tomasz
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to