Re: [PATCH 1/2] gpio: gpio-pca953x.c: Correct type of reg_direction

2019-08-28 Thread David Jander
On Wed, 28 Aug 2019 12:56:28 +0200 Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > śr., 28 sie 2019 o 10:38 Bartosz Golaszewski > napisał(a): > > > > wt., 27 sie 2019 o 08:46 David Jander napisał(a): > > > > > > The type of reg_direction needs to match the t

[PATCH 1/2] gpio: gpio-pca953x.c: Correct type of reg_direction

2019-08-27 Thread David Jander
The type of reg_direction needs to match the type of the regmap, which is u8. Signed-off-by: David Jander --- drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c index 378b206d2dc9

[PATCH 2/2] gpio: pca953x.c: Use pca953x_read_regs instead of regmap_bulk_read

2019-08-27 Thread David Jander
The register number needs to be translated for chips with more than 8 ports. This patch fixes a bug causing all chips with more than 8 GPIO pins to not work correctly. Signed-off-by: David Jander --- drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c | 9 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions

Re: SDHCI long sleep with interrupts off

2015-12-17 Thread David Jander
st of the effort will be at cleaning up the mess and make sure that each one of the many users works well afterwards, and it definitely takes someone who knows the code (and it's users) very well to pull this off. Best regards, -- David Jander Protonic Holland. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: SDHCI long sleep with interrupts off

2015-12-17 Thread David Jander
On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 12:39:20 +0100 Ulf Hansson wrote: > On 17 December 2015 at 12:27, Lucas Stach wrote: > > Am Donnerstag, den 17.12.2015, 12:20 +0100 schrieb David Jander: > >> Hi Lucas, > >> > >> Thanks for reacting. > >> > >> On T

Re: SDHCI long sleep with interrupts off

2015-12-17 Thread David Jander
Hi Lucas, Thanks for reacting. On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 12:03:10 +0100 Lucas Stach wrote: > Am Donnerstag, den 17.12.2015, 11:28 +0100 schrieb David Jander: > > Hi all, > > > > I was investigating the source of abnormal irq-latency spikes on an i.MX6 > >

SDHCI long sleep with interrupts off

2015-12-17 Thread David Jander
e either must be a reason this hasn't been fixed in such a long time, or I am not understanding this correctly, so please enlighten me. Before trying a cowboy attempt at "fixing" this, I'd really like to know why am I seeing this? I mean... how can such a problem get unnoticed and unfixed for

Re: SDHCI long sleep with interrupts off

2015-12-17 Thread David Jander
e and my knowledge. I think most of the effort will be at cleaning up the mess and make sure that each one of the many users works well afterwards, and it definitely takes someone who knows the code (and it's users) very well to pull this off. Best regards, -- David Jander Protonic Holland.

Re: SDHCI long sleep with interrupts off

2015-12-17 Thread David Jander
On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 12:39:20 +0100 Ulf Hansson <ulf.hans...@linaro.org> wrote: > On 17 December 2015 at 12:27, Lucas Stach <l.st...@pengutronix.de> wrote: > > Am Donnerstag, den 17.12.2015, 12:20 +0100 schrieb David Jander: > >> Hi Lucas, > >> > >&g

SDHCI long sleep with interrupts off

2015-12-17 Thread David Jander
e either must be a reason this hasn't been fixed in such a long time, or I am not understanding this correctly, so please enlighten me. Before trying a cowboy attempt at "fixing" this, I'd really like to know why am I seeing this? I mean... how can such a problem get unnoticed and unfixed for

Re: SDHCI long sleep with interrupts off

2015-12-17 Thread David Jander
Hi Lucas, Thanks for reacting. On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 12:03:10 +0100 Lucas Stach <l.st...@pengutronix.de> wrote: > Am Donnerstag, den 17.12.2015, 11:28 +0100 schrieb David Jander: > > Hi all, > > > > I was investigating the source of abnormal irq-latency spikes

Re: [RFC PATCH] mmc: core: Optimize case for exactly one erase-group budget TRIM

2015-06-26 Thread David Jander
Dear Ulf, On Thu, 4 Jun 2015 10:31:59 +0200 Ulf Hansson wrote: > On 3 June 2015 at 10:34, David Jander wrote: > > In the (not so unlikely) case that the mmc controller timeout budget is > > enough for exactly one erase-group, the simplification of allowing one > > s

Re: [RFC PATCH] mmc: core: Optimize case for exactly one erase-group budget TRIM

2015-06-26 Thread David Jander
Dear Ulf, On Thu, 4 Jun 2015 10:31:59 +0200 Ulf Hansson ulf.hans...@linaro.org wrote: On 3 June 2015 at 10:34, David Jander da...@protonic.nl wrote: In the (not so unlikely) case that the mmc controller timeout budget is enough for exactly one erase-group, the simplification of allowing

[FRC PATCH v2] mmc: core: Optimize case for exactly one erase-group budget TRIM

2015-06-23 Thread David Jander
can allow trimming more than one sector at a time. Signed-off-by: David Jander --- Changes since v1: - Added more comment drivers/mmc/core/core.c | 38 ++ include/linux/mmc/card.h | 1 + 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers

[FRC PATCH v2] mmc: core: Optimize case for exactly one erase-group budget TRIM

2015-06-23 Thread David Jander
can allow trimming more than one sector at a time. Signed-off-by: David Jander da...@protonic.nl --- Changes since v1: - Added more comment drivers/mmc/core/core.c | 38 ++ include/linux/mmc/card.h | 1 + 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 4 deletions

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] mmc: core.c: Add comment to clarify special cases of ERASE/TRIM

2015-06-04 Thread David Jander
Dear Adrian, Thanks for reacting. On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 14:16:23 +0300 Adrian Hunter wrote: > On 04/06/15 13:20, David Jander wrote: > > Signed-off-by: David Jander > > Please never send delta patches. Always send a new version of the whole > patch. Sorry for th

[RFC PATCH 2/2] mmc: core.c: Add comment to clarify special cases of ERASE/TRIM

2015-06-04 Thread David Jander
Signed-off-by: David Jander --- drivers/mmc/core/core.c | 28 +++- 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c index 6c9611b..b6aa9ad 100644 --- a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c

Re: [RFC PATCH] mmc: core: Optimize case for exactly one erase-group budget TRIM

2015-06-04 Thread David Jander
On Thu, 4 Jun 2015 10:31:59 +0200 Ulf Hansson wrote: > On 3 June 2015 at 10:34, David Jander wrote: > > In the (not so unlikely) case that the mmc controller timeout budget is > > enough for exactly one erase-group, the simplification of allowing one > > sector has an

Re: [PATCH] mmc: core: Fix off-by-one error in mmc_do_calc_max_discard()

2015-06-04 Thread David Jander
On Thu, 4 Jun 2015 10:15:28 +0200 Ulf Hansson wrote: > On 1 June 2015 at 15:32, David Jander wrote: > > On Mon, 01 Jun 2015 15:38:51 +0300 > > Adrian Hunter wrote: > > > >> On 01/06/15 15:30, David Jander wrote: > >> > On Mon, 01 Jun 2015

Re: [PATCH] mmc: core: Fix off-by-one error in mmc_do_calc_max_discard()

2015-06-04 Thread David Jander
On Thu, 4 Jun 2015 10:15:28 +0200 Ulf Hansson ulf.hans...@linaro.org wrote: On 1 June 2015 at 15:32, David Jander da...@protonic.nl wrote: On Mon, 01 Jun 2015 15:38:51 +0300 Adrian Hunter adrian.hun...@intel.com wrote: On 01/06/15 15:30, David Jander wrote: On Mon, 01 Jun 2015 14:50

Re: [RFC PATCH] mmc: core: Optimize case for exactly one erase-group budget TRIM

2015-06-04 Thread David Jander
On Thu, 4 Jun 2015 10:31:59 +0200 Ulf Hansson ulf.hans...@linaro.org wrote: On 3 June 2015 at 10:34, David Jander da...@protonic.nl wrote: In the (not so unlikely) case that the mmc controller timeout budget is enough for exactly one erase-group, the simplification of allowing one sector

[RFC PATCH 2/2] mmc: core.c: Add comment to clarify special cases of ERASE/TRIM

2015-06-04 Thread David Jander
Signed-off-by: David Jander da...@protonic.nl --- drivers/mmc/core/core.c | 28 +++- 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c index 6c9611b..b6aa9ad 100644 --- a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c +++ b/drivers

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] mmc: core.c: Add comment to clarify special cases of ERASE/TRIM

2015-06-04 Thread David Jander
Dear Adrian, Thanks for reacting. On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 14:16:23 +0300 Adrian Hunter adrian.hun...@intel.com wrote: On 04/06/15 13:20, David Jander wrote: Signed-off-by: David Jander da...@protonic.nl Please never send delta patches. Always send a new version of the whole patch. Sorry

[RFC PATCH] mmc: core: Optimize case for exactly one erase-group budget TRIM

2015-06-03 Thread David Jander
can allow trimming more than one sector at a time. Signed-off-by: David Jander --- drivers/mmc/core/core.c | 21 + include/linux/mmc/card.h | 1 + 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c index 92e7671

[RFC PATCH] mmc: core: Optimize case for exactly one erase-group budget TRIM

2015-06-03 Thread David Jander
can allow trimming more than one sector at a time. Signed-off-by: David Jander da...@protonic.nl --- drivers/mmc/core/core.c | 21 + include/linux/mmc/card.h | 1 + 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c

Re: [PATCH] mmc: core: Fix off-by-one error in mmc_do_calc_max_discard()

2015-06-01 Thread David Jander
On Mon, 01 Jun 2015 15:38:51 +0300 Adrian Hunter wrote: > On 01/06/15 15:30, David Jander wrote: > > On Mon, 01 Jun 2015 14:50:47 +0300 > > Adrian Hunter wrote: > > > >> On 01/06/15 14:32, David Jander wrote: > >>> On Mon, 01 Jun 2015

Re: [PATCH] mmc: core: Fix off-by-one error in mmc_do_calc_max_discard()

2015-06-01 Thread David Jander
On Mon, 01 Jun 2015 14:50:47 +0300 Adrian Hunter wrote: > On 01/06/15 14:32, David Jander wrote: > > On Mon, 01 Jun 2015 13:36:45 +0300 > > Adrian Hunter wrote: > > > >> On 01/06/15 12:20, David Jander wrote: > >>> qty is the maximum numb

Re: [PATCH] mmc: core: Fix off-by-one error in mmc_do_calc_max_discard()

2015-06-01 Thread David Jander
On Mon, 01 Jun 2015 13:36:45 +0300 Adrian Hunter wrote: > On 01/06/15 12:20, David Jander wrote: > > qty is the maximum number of discard that _do_ fit in the timeout, not > > the first amount that does _not_ fit anymore. > > This seemingly harmless error has a very seve

[PATCH] mmc: core: Fix off-by-one error in mmc_do_calc_max_discard()

2015-06-01 Thread David Jander
qty is the maximum number of discard that _do_ fit in the timeout, not the first amount that does _not_ fit anymore. This seemingly harmless error has a very severe performance impact when the timeout value is enough for only 1 erase group. Signed-off-by: David Jander --- drivers/mmc/core

Re: [PATCH] mmc: core: Fix off-by-one error in mmc_do_calc_max_discard()

2015-06-01 Thread David Jander
On Mon, 01 Jun 2015 13:36:45 +0300 Adrian Hunter adrian.hun...@intel.com wrote: On 01/06/15 12:20, David Jander wrote: qty is the maximum number of discard that _do_ fit in the timeout, not the first amount that does _not_ fit anymore. This seemingly harmless error has a very severe

Re: [PATCH] mmc: core: Fix off-by-one error in mmc_do_calc_max_discard()

2015-06-01 Thread David Jander
On Mon, 01 Jun 2015 14:50:47 +0300 Adrian Hunter adrian.hun...@intel.com wrote: On 01/06/15 14:32, David Jander wrote: On Mon, 01 Jun 2015 13:36:45 +0300 Adrian Hunter adrian.hun...@intel.com wrote: On 01/06/15 12:20, David Jander wrote: qty is the maximum number of discard that _do_

[PATCH] mmc: core: Fix off-by-one error in mmc_do_calc_max_discard()

2015-06-01 Thread David Jander
qty is the maximum number of discard that _do_ fit in the timeout, not the first amount that does _not_ fit anymore. This seemingly harmless error has a very severe performance impact when the timeout value is enough for only 1 erase group. Signed-off-by: David Jander da...@protonic.nl

Re: [PATCH] mmc: core: Fix off-by-one error in mmc_do_calc_max_discard()

2015-06-01 Thread David Jander
On Mon, 01 Jun 2015 15:38:51 +0300 Adrian Hunter adrian.hun...@intel.com wrote: On 01/06/15 15:30, David Jander wrote: On Mon, 01 Jun 2015 14:50:47 +0300 Adrian Hunter adrian.hun...@intel.com wrote: On 01/06/15 14:32, David Jander wrote: On Mon, 01 Jun 2015 13:36:45 +0300 Adrian

[PATCH V2] drivers: regmap: regcache-rbtree.c: Fix overlapping rbnodes.

2013-08-21 Thread David Jander
this node to overlap with another node. Those nodes should be merged, but this merge doesn't happen yet, so this patch at least makes the initial blklen small enough to avoid hitting the wrong node, which may otherwise lead to severe breakage. Signed-off-by: David Jander --- drivers/base/regmap

Re: [PATCH] drivers: regmap: bugfix in regcache-rbtree.c

2013-08-21 Thread David Jander
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 15:44:42 +0100 Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 04:21:43PM +0200, David Jander wrote: > > > I hope you can explain to me how regcache_rbtree_node_alloc() is supposed > > to work, because I start to think that something in there is broken... >

Re: [PATCH] drivers: regmap: bugfix in regcache-rbtree.c

2013-08-21 Thread David Jander
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 15:08:16 +0100 Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 03:14:23PM +0200, David Jander wrote: > > > Here's the explanation: > > > 1. If a driver initializes a regmap with a RB-tree cache, and starts > > writing to registers in some arb

Re: [PATCH] drivers: regmap: bugfix in regcache-rbtree.c

2013-08-21 Thread David Jander
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 15:08:16 +0100 Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 03:14:23PM +0200, David Jander wrote: > > > Here's the explanation: > > > 1. If a driver initializes a regmap with a RB-tree cache, and starts > > writing to registers in some arb

Re: [PATCH] drivers: regmap: bugfix in regcache-rbtree.c

2013-08-21 Thread David Jander
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 14:32:00 +0100 Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 03:02:35PM +0200, David Jander wrote: > > > rbnode register ranges can overlap, which is not a problem as long as > > They can? They aren't supposed to and I'd expect this to cause problems >

Re: [PATCH] drivers: regmap: bugfix in regcache-rbtree.c

2013-08-21 Thread David Jander
Hi Dimitris, On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 15:02:35 +0200 David Jander wrote: > The functionality of rbtree_ctx->cached_rbnode is broken. Remove it to > avoid hitting the wrong rbnode when locating a register. > rbnode register ranges can overlap, which is not a problem as long as &g

[PATCH] drivers: regmap: bugfix in regcache-rbtree.c

2013-08-21 Thread David Jander
rom the top of the rb-tree _always_. Signed-off-by: David Jander --- drivers/base/regmap/regcache-rbtree.c | 13 - 1 file changed, 13 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/base/regmap/regcache-rbtree.c b/drivers/base/regmap/regcache-rbtree.c index 5c1435c..2f9783f 100644 --- a/drivers/base/reg

[PATCH] drivers: regmap: bugfix in regcache-rbtree.c

2013-08-21 Thread David Jander
of the rb-tree _always_. Signed-off-by: David Jander da...@protonic.nl --- drivers/base/regmap/regcache-rbtree.c | 13 - 1 file changed, 13 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/base/regmap/regcache-rbtree.c b/drivers/base/regmap/regcache-rbtree.c index 5c1435c..2f9783f 100644

Re: [PATCH] drivers: regmap: bugfix in regcache-rbtree.c

2013-08-21 Thread David Jander
Hi Dimitris, On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 15:02:35 +0200 David Jander da...@protonic.nl wrote: The functionality of rbtree_ctx-cached_rbnode is broken. Remove it to avoid hitting the wrong rbnode when locating a register. rbnode register ranges can overlap, which is not a problem as long as every

Re: [PATCH] drivers: regmap: bugfix in regcache-rbtree.c

2013-08-21 Thread David Jander
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 14:32:00 +0100 Mark Brown broo...@kernel.org wrote: On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 03:02:35PM +0200, David Jander wrote: rbnode register ranges can overlap, which is not a problem as long as They can? They aren't supposed to and I'd expect this to cause problems

Re: [PATCH] drivers: regmap: bugfix in regcache-rbtree.c

2013-08-21 Thread David Jander
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 15:08:16 +0100 Mark Brown broo...@kernel.org wrote: On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 03:14:23PM +0200, David Jander wrote: Here's the explanation: 1. If a driver initializes a regmap with a RB-tree cache, and starts writing to registers in some arbitrary order, you might get

Re: [PATCH] drivers: regmap: bugfix in regcache-rbtree.c

2013-08-21 Thread David Jander
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 15:08:16 +0100 Mark Brown broo...@kernel.org wrote: On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 03:14:23PM +0200, David Jander wrote: Here's the explanation: 1. If a driver initializes a regmap with a RB-tree cache, and starts writing to registers in some arbitrary order, you might get

Re: [PATCH] drivers: regmap: bugfix in regcache-rbtree.c

2013-08-21 Thread David Jander
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 15:44:42 +0100 Mark Brown broo...@kernel.org wrote: On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 04:21:43PM +0200, David Jander wrote: I hope you can explain to me how regcache_rbtree_node_alloc() is supposed to work, because I start to think that something in there is broken... Specially

[PATCH V2] drivers: regmap: regcache-rbtree.c: Fix overlapping rbnodes.

2013-08-21 Thread David Jander
this node to overlap with another node. Those nodes should be merged, but this merge doesn't happen yet, so this patch at least makes the initial blklen small enough to avoid hitting the wrong node, which may otherwise lead to severe breakage. Signed-off-by: David Jander da...@protonic.nl --- drivers