On 2020-06-23 14:59, Lee Jones wrote:
> Suggestion #2
>
>> 2) Modify patch 1/3. The small part of the patch to modify is:
>>
>> +static int mfd_match_of_node_to_dev(struct platform_device *pdev,
>> +struct device_node *np,
>> +
On 2020-06-11 14:10, Lee Jones wrote:
> Currently, when a child platform device (sometimes referred to as a
> sub-device) is registered via the Multi-Functional Device (MFD) API,
> the framework attempts to match the newly registered platform device
> with its associated Device Tree (OF) node. Unt
On 2020-06-23 01:47, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jun 2020, Frank Rowand wrote:
>
>> On 2020-06-22 14:11, Lee Jones wrote:
>>> On Mon, 22 Jun 2020, Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2020-06-22 10:10, Lee Jones wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 22 Jun 2
On 2020-06-22 20:17, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 2020-06-22 17:23, Frank Rowand wrote:
>> On 2020-06-22 14:11, Lee Jones wrote:
>>> On Mon, 22 Jun 2020, Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2020-06-22 10:10, Lee Jones wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 22 Jun 2020
On 2020-06-22 17:23, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 2020-06-22 14:11, Lee Jones wrote:
>> On Mon, 22 Jun 2020, Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>>> On 2020-06-22 10:10, Lee Jones wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 22 Jun 2020, Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2020-
On 2020-06-22 14:11, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jun 2020, Frank Rowand wrote:
>
>> On 2020-06-22 10:10, Lee Jones wrote:
>>> On Mon, 22 Jun 2020, Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2020-06-22 03:50, Lee Jones wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 18 Jun 2
On 2020-06-22 13:01, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 2020-06-22 10:10, Lee Jones wrote:
>> On Mon, 22 Jun 2020, Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>>> On 2020-06-22 03:50, Lee Jones wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 18 Jun 2020, Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2020-
On 2020-06-22 10:10, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jun 2020, Frank Rowand wrote:
>
>> On 2020-06-22 03:50, Lee Jones wrote:
>>> On Thu, 18 Jun 2020, Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2020-06-15 04:26, Lee Jones wrote:
>>>>> On
On 2020-06-22 03:09, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2020, Lee Jones wrote:
>
>> Currently, when a child platform device (sometimes referred to as a
>> sub-device) is registered via the Multi-Functional Device (MFD) API,
>> the framework attempts to match the newly registered platform device
>>
On 2020-06-22 09:32, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 2020-06-22 03:50, Lee Jones wrote:
>> On Thu, 18 Jun 2020, Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>>> On 2020-06-15 04:26, Lee Jones wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 14 Jun 2020, Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Lee,
On 2020-06-22 03:50, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Jun 2020, Frank Rowand wrote:
>
>> On 2020-06-15 04:26, Lee Jones wrote:
>>> On Sun, 14 Jun 2020, Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Lee,
>>>>
>>>> I'm looking at 5.8-rc
On 2020-06-21 17:49, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 2020-06-21 17:45, Frank Rowand wrote:
>> Tim Bird started a thread [1] proposing that he document the selftest result
>> format used by Linux kernel tests.
>>
>> [1]
>> https://lore.kernel.org/r/cy4pr13mb1175b804e3
On 2020-06-21 17:45, Frank Rowand wrote:
> Tim Bird started a thread [1] proposing that he document the selftest result
> format used by Linux kernel tests.
>
> [1]
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/cy4pr13mb1175b804e31e502221bc8163fd...@cy4pr13mb1175.namprd13.prod.outlook.com
&g
On 2020-06-21 17:45, Frank Rowand wrote:
> Tim Bird started a thread [1] proposing that he document the selftest result
> format used by Linux kernel tests.
>
> [1]
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/cy4pr13mb1175b804e31e502221bc8163fd...@cy4pr13mb1175.namprd13.prod.outlook.com
&g
On 2020-06-21 17:45, Frank Rowand wrote:
> Tim Bird started a thread [1] proposing that he document the selftest result
> format used by Linux kernel tests.
>
> [1]
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/cy4pr13mb1175b804e31e502221bc8163fd...@cy4pr13mb1175.namprd13.prod.outlook.com
&g
On 2020-06-21 17:45, Frank Rowand wrote:
> Tim Bird started a thread [1] proposing that he document the selftest result
> format used by Linux kernel tests.
>
> [1]
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/cy4pr13mb1175b804e31e502221bc8163fd...@cy4pr13mb1175.namprd13.prod.outlook.com
&g
On 2020-06-21 17:45, Frank Rowand wrote:
> Tim Bird started a thread [1] proposing that he document the selftest result
> format used by Linux kernel tests.
>
> [1]
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/cy4pr13mb1175b804e31e502221bc8163fd...@cy4pr13mb1175.namprd13.prod.outlook.com
&g
Tim Bird started a thread [1] proposing that he document the selftest result
format used by Linux kernel tests.
[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/r/cy4pr13mb1175b804e31e502221bc8163fd...@cy4pr13mb1175.namprd13.prod.outlook.com
The issue of messages generated by the kernel being tested (that are not
On 2020-06-20 01:44, David Gow wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 1:58 AM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>> On 2020-06-16 07:08, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> On 15/06/20 21:07, Bird, Tim wrote:
>
>>>>>> Finally,
>>>>>> - Should a SKIP res
On 2020-06-19 17:58, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 19/06/20 20:47, Frank Rowand wrote:
>> Or if the entire test depends on the missing config then Bail out might
>> be appropriate.
>
> No, in that case you want
>
> 1..0 # SKIP: unsupported configuration
>
> T
On 2020-06-16 23:05, David Gow wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 11:36 AM Kees Cook wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 02:30:45AM +, Bird, Tim wrote:
>>> Agreed. You only need machine-parsable data if you expect the CI
>>> system to do something more with the data than just present it.
>>> W
On 2020-06-15 14:07, Bird, Tim wrote:
> Kees,
>
> Thanks for the great feedback. See comments inline below.
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Kees Cook
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 06:11:06PM +, Bird, Tim wrote:
>>> The kernel test result format consists of 5 major elements,
>>> 4 o
On 2020-06-16 18:52, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 07:07:34PM +, Bird, Tim wrote:
>> From: Kees Cook
>>> Note: making the plan line required differs from TAP13 and TAP14. I
>>> think it's the right choice, but we should be clear.
>>
>> [...]
>> With regards to making it optional o
On 2020-06-16 18:58, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 12:44:28PM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 9:42 AM Bird, Tim wrote:
From: Paolo Bonzini
On 15/06/20 21:07, Bird, Tim wrote:
>> Note: making the plan line required differs from TAP13 and TAP
On 2020-06-16 11:42, Bird, Tim wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Paolo Bonzini
>>
>> On 15/06/20 21:07, Bird, Tim wrote:
Note: making the plan line required differs from TAP13 and TAP14. I
think it's the right choice, but we should be clear.
>>
>> As an aside, where is
On 2020-06-16 15:03, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 10:34 AM Bird, Tim wrote:
>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: David Gow
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 2:11 AM Bird, Tim wrote:
> [...]
>>> KUnit is currently outputting "TAP version 14", as we were hoping some
>>> of
On 2020-06-16 07:08, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 15/06/20 21:07, Bird, Tim wrote:
>>> Note: making the plan line required differs from TAP13 and TAP14. I
>>> think it's the right choice, but we should be clear.
>
> As an aside, where is TAP14?
>
>> With regards to making it optional or not, I don't
On 2020-06-10 13:11, Bird, Tim wrote:
> Some months ago I started work on a document to formalize how
> kselftest implements the TAP specification. However, I didn't finish
> that work. Maybe it's time to do so now.
>
> kselftest has developed a few differences from the original
> TAP specificat
On 2020-06-15 04:26, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Jun 2020, Frank Rowand wrote:
>
>> Hi Lee,
>>
>> I'm looking at 5.8-rc1.
>>
>> The only use of OF_MFD_CELL() where the same compatible is specified
>> for multiple elements of a struct mfd_cell ar
Hi Lee,
I'm looking at 5.8-rc1.
The only use of OF_MFD_CELL() where the same compatible is specified
for multiple elements of a struct mfd_cell array is for compatible
"stericsson,ab8500-pwm" in drivers/mfd/ab8500-core.c:
OF_MFD_CELL("ab8500-pwm",
NULL, NULL, 0, 1, "s
+Frank (me)
On 2020-06-11 14:10, Lee Jones wrote:
> Extend current list of helpers to provide support for parent drivers
> wishing to match specific child devices to particular OF nodes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones
> ---
> include/linux/mfd/core.h | 17 +++--
> 1 file changed, 11 i
+Frank (me)
On 2020-06-11 14:10, Lee Jones wrote:
> Remove unnecessary '\'s and leading tabs.
>
> This will help to clean-up future diffs when subsequent changes are
> made.
>
> Hint: The aforementioned changes follow this patch.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones
> ---
> include/linux/mfd/core.h |
+ Frank (me)
On 2020-06-11 14:10, Lee Jones wrote:
> Currently, when a child platform device (sometimes referred to as a
> sub-device) is registered via the Multi-Functional Device (MFD) API,
> the framework attempts to match the newly registered platform device
> with its associated Device Tree (
Hi Lee,
On 2020-06-09 06:01, Lee Jones wrote:
> Good morning,
>
> After a number of reports/queries surrounding a known long-term issue
> in the MFD core, including the submission of a couple of attempted
> solutions, I've decided to finally tackle this one myself.
>
> Currently, when a child pl
Hi Lee,
Please add me to the distribution list for future versions of this.
-Frank
On 2020-06-09 06:01, Lee Jones wrote:
> Good morning,
>
> After a number of reports/queries surrounding a known long-term issue
> in the MFD core, including the submission of a couple of attempted
> solutions, I'
+ ksummit-disc...@lists.linuxfoundation.org
On 5/15/20 11:39 AM, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> [ Feel free to forward this to other Linux kernel mailing lists as
> appropriate -- Ted ]
Hi Ted,
Can you please add ksummit-disc...@lists.linuxfoundation.org to future
related emails?
Thanks,
Frank
>
patch
was not in -next, so the conflict remains.
If Mauro's patches should go in first, I can redo my patches on top of
his, after his go in.
-Frank
On 1/27/20 6:37 PM, frowand.l...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Frank Rowand
>
> The overlay implementation details in the compiled (
Hi Rob,
On 09/11/2019 04:31, Colin King wrote:
> From: Colin Ian King
>
> There is a spelling mistake in an error message. Fix it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King
> ---
> scripts/dtc/fdtput.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/scripts/dtc/fdtput.c b/s
On 10/17/2019 12:52, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 12:25 PM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>> On 10/17/2019 11:34, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 08:01:46PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
>>>> Hi Andrew,
>>>>
>
Hi Raghavendra,
I have not received your emails in this conversation, and I do not see
them in my spam folder. I see some replies from Rob, so I am guessing
he added me to the CC: list.
Please add me to future Devicetree emails.
Digging a little deeper, in the devicetree mail list archive, I se
is added.
>>
>> Fixes: b951f9dc7f25 ("Enabling OF selftest to run without machine's
>> devicetree")
>> Signed-off-by: Navid Emamdoost
>> ---
>> drivers/of/unittest.c | 1 +
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>
> Applied, thanks.
>
> Rob
>
Academic since already applied, but:
Reviewed-by: Frank Rowand
gt; {
> return NULL;
> }
> -#define of_match_device(matches, dev)\
> - __of_match_device(of_match_ptr(matches), (dev))
>
> static inline struct device_node *of_cpu_device_node_get(int cpu)
> {
>
Acked-by: Frank Rowand
On 10/17/2019 11:34, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 08:01:46PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
>> Hi Andrew,
>>
>> Could you pick up this to akpm tree?
>> https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1089856/
>>
>> I believe this is correct, and a good clean-up.
>>
>> I pinged the DT maintai
On 10/16/2019 06:01, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Could you pick up this to akpm tree?
> https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1089856/
>
> I believe this is correct, and a good clean-up.
>
> I pinged the DT maintainers, but they did not respond.
Sorry for the delay in responding.
On 10/17/2019 07:51, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 1:59 AM Geert Uytterhoeven
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Stephen,
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 1:23 AM Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>> Quoting Geert Uytterhoeven (2019-10-16 07:31:42)
diff --git a/drivers/of/unittest.c b/drivers/of/unittest.c
>
Hi Denis,
On 8/27/19 7:57 AM, Denis Efremov wrote:
> The strlen && strprefixeq check in get_node_by_path is
> excessive, since strlen is checked in strprefixeq macro
> internally. Thus, 'strlen(child->name) == p-path'
> conjunct duplicates after macro expansion and could
> be removed.
>
> Signed-
On 8/20/19 3:10 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 9:25 PM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>> On 8/19/19 5:00 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
>>> On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 8:38 PM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>>
< snip >
>>>
>>> 3. The sup
On 8/20/19 7:01 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019, 6:56 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman <mailto:gre...@linuxfoundation.org>> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 06:06:55PM -0700, Frank Rowand wrote:
> > On 8/20/19 3:10 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
On 8/20/19 3:10 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 9:25 PM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>> On 8/19/19 5:00 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
>>> On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 8:38 PM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 8/15/19 6:50 PM, Saravana Ka
On 8/19/19 5:00 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 8:38 PM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>> On 8/15/19 6:50 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 7:04 PM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 17:10:54 -
On 8/15/19 6:50 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 7:04 PM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>>> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 17:10:54 -0700
>>> Subject: [PATCH v7 1/7] driver core: Add support for linking devices during
>>> device addition
>>> Fr
On 8/16/19 1:52 PM, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 8/16/19 8:23 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 07:05:06AM -0700, Frank Rowand wrote:
>>> i Greg,
>>>
>>> On 8/16/19 2:10 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 a
On 8/16/19 8:23 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 07:05:06AM -0700, Frank Rowand wrote:
>> i Greg,
>>
>> On 8/16/19 2:10 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 08:09:19PM -0700, Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>> Hi Sarava
i Greg,
On 8/16/19 2:10 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 08:09:19PM -0700, Frank Rowand wrote:
>> Hi Saravana,
>>
>> On 8/15/19 6:50 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
>>> On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 10:20 PM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>>
>
Hi Saravana,
On 8/15/19 6:50 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 10:20 PM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>> On 8/9/19 10:00 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
>>> On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 7:57 PM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Saravana,
>
On 8/9/19 10:00 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 7:57 PM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>> Hi Saravana,
>>
>> On 7/31/19 3:17 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
>>> Add device-links to track functional dependencies between devices
>>> after the
Hi Saravana,
On 7/31/19 3:17 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> Add device-links to track functional dependencies between devices
> after they are created (but before they are probed) by looking at
> their common DT bindings like clocks, interconnects, etc.
>
> Having functional dependencies automatica
On 8/8/19 7:18 AM, Anders Roxell wrote:
> GCC warns that a negative integer can be returned but the
> of_link_property() function should return a boolean.
>
> ../drivers/of/platform.c: In function ‘of_link_property’:
> ../drivers/of/platform.c:650:18: warning: ?: using integer constants in
> bool
Hi Greg, Saravana,
On 8/1/19 11:37 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 12:59:25PM -0700, Frank Rowand wrote:
>> On 8/1/19 12:32 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>> On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 12:28:13PM -0700, Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>> Hi Greg,
>&
> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 17:10:55 -0700
> Subject: [PATCH v7 2/7] driver core: Add edit_links() callback for drivers
> From: Saravana Kannan
>
> The driver core/bus adding supplier-consumer dependencies by default
> enables functional dependencies to be tracked correctly even when the
> consumer
> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 17:10:54 -0700
> Subject: [PATCH v7 1/7] driver core: Add support for linking devices during
> device addition
> From: Saravana Kannan
>
> When devices are added, the bus might want to create device links to track
> functional dependencies between supplier and consumer d
Hi Saravana,
On 7/23/19 5:10 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> Add device-links to track functional dependencies between devices
> after they are created (but before they are probed) by looking at
> their common DT bindings like clocks, interconnects, etc.
>
< snip >
I know that this series has move
On 8/1/19 12:32 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 12:28:13PM -0700, Frank Rowand wrote:
>> Hi Greg,
>>
>> On 7/31/19 11:12 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 03:17:13PM -0700, Saravana Kannan wrote:
>>>> Add dev
Hi Greg,
On 7/31/19 11:12 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 03:17:13PM -0700, Saravana Kannan wrote:
>> Add device-links to track functional dependencies between devices
>> after they are created (but before they are probed) by looking at
>> their common DT bindings like cloc
Hi Greg, Rob,
On 7/26/19 7:32 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 02:04:23PM -0700, Frank Rowand wrote:
>> On 7/25/19 6:42 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 05:10:53PM -0700, Saravana Kannan wrote:
>>>> Add device-links to
On 7/25/19 6:42 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 05:10:53PM -0700, Saravana Kannan wrote:
>> Add device-links to track functional dependencies between devices
>> after they are created (but before they are probed) by looking at
>> their common DT bindings like clocks, interco
On 7/16/19 3:56 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 7:05 PM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>> On 7/15/19 11:40 AM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
>>> Replying again because the previous email accidentally included HTML.
>>>
>>> Thanks for taking the
of testing so that we have a
chance of finding systems that have trouble with the changes and could
potentially be fixed before impacting a large number of users.
-Frank
>
> -Saravana
>
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 7:39 AM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>> On 7/15/19 7:26 AM, Frank R
you find that easier.
On 6/24/19 10:00 PM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> Hi Frank,
>
> On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 15:31:07 -0700
> Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>>> Currently, kernel support boot-time tracing using kernel command-line
>>>>> parameters. But that is v
Hi Masami,
After receiving this email, I replied to one email on the v1 thread,
so there will be a little bit of overlap in the ordering of the two
threads. Feel free to reply to my comments in the v1 thread in this
thread instead.
More comments below.
On 7/14/19 10:11 PM, Masami Hiramatsu wrot
On 7/15/19 7:26 AM, Frank Rowand wrote:
> HiRob,
>
> Sorry for such a late reply...
>
>
> On 7/1/19 8:25 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 6:32 PM Rob Herring wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 6:48 PM Saravana Kannan wrote:
&g
HiRob,
Sorry for such a late reply...
On 7/1/19 8:25 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 6:32 PM Rob Herring wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 6:48 PM Saravana Kannan wrote:
>>>
>>> Add device-links after the devices are created (but before they are
>>> probed) by looking at
On 6/26/19 2:58 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 10:18 AM Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Here is an RFC series of patches to add boot-time tracing using
>> devicetree.
>>
>> Currently, kernel support boot-time tracing using kernel command-line
>> parameters. But that is ve
On 6/25/19 9:30 PM, Sandeep Patil wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 11:53:13AM +0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 03:37:07PM -0700, Sandeep Patil wrote:
>>> We are trying to make sure that all (most) drivers in an Aarch64 system can
>>> be kernel modules for Android, like an
On 6/23/19 7:52 PM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> Hi Frank,
>
> Thank you for your comment!
>
> On Sun, 23 Jun 2019 12:58:45 -0700
> Frank Rowand wrote:
>
>> Hi Masami,
>>
>> On 6/21/19 9:18 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>&g
Hi Masami,
On 6/21/19 9:18 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here is an RFC series of patches to add boot-time tracing using
> devicetree.
>
> Currently, kernel support boot-time tracing using kernel command-line
> parameters. But that is very limited because of limited expressions
> and lim
Hi Arnd,
Thanks for catching this.
The bad news is that you are second in line, Kefeng Wang sent a patch to
do the same last week.
Thanks!
-Frank
On 6/17/19 5:38 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> The only caller of this function is built conditionally:
>
> drivers/of/fdt.c:129:19: error: 'of_fdt_ma
Adding cc: David Collins
Plus my comments below.
On 6/3/19 5:32 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> Add a generic "depends-on" property that allows specifying mandatory
> functional dependencies between devices. Add device-links after the
> devices are created (but before they are probed) by looking at
;>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 01:56:25PM -0700, 'Saravana Kannan' via
>>>>>>> kernel-team wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 8:18 AM Frank Rowand
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>
On 6/12/19 6:53 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 3:52 PM Sandeep Patil wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 01:56:25PM -0700, 'Saravana Kannan' via kernel-team
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 8:18 AM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>
On 6/12/19 10:00 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 10:45 AM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>> Hi Kefeng,
>>
>> If Rob agrees, I'd like to see one more change in this patch.
>>
>> Since the only caller of of_fdt_match() is of_flat_dt_match(),
>
t; wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 8:18 AM Frank Rowand
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Saravana,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 6/10/19 10:36 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
>>>>>> Why are you resending this r
On 6/12/19 9:07 AM, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 6/12/19 6:53 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 3:52 PM Sandeep Patil wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 01:56:25PM -0700, 'Saravana Kannan' via kernel-team
>>> wrote:
>>>>
*blob, unsigned long node,
>
> Move of_fdt_match() and of_fdt_is_compatible() under CONFIG_OF_EARLY_FLATTREE
> to fix it.
>
> Cc: Stephen Boyd
> Cc: Rob Herring
> Cc: Frank Rowand
> Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang
> ---
> drivers/of/fdt.c | 106 +++
On 6/12/19 6:53 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 3:52 PM Sandeep Patil wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 01:56:25PM -0700, 'Saravana Kannan' via kernel-team
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 8:18 AM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>
Hi Saravana,
On 6/10/19 10:36 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> Why are you resending this rather than replying to Frank's last
> comments on the original?
Adding on a different aspect... The independent replies from three different
maintainers (Rob, Mark, myself) pointed out architectural issues with th
Hi Saravana,
On 5/24/19 9:04 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 7:40 PM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>> Hi Saranova,
>>
>> I'll try to address the other portions of this email that I
>> in my previous replies.
>>
>>
>> On 5/
Hi Saravana,
(I notice that I never seem to spell your name correctly. Apologies for that,
both past and future).
This email was never answered.
-Frank
On 5/24/19 5:12 PM, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 5/24/19 11:21 AM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
>> On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 10:56 AM Fra
Hi Phil,
On 6/4/19 5:15 AM, Phil Elwell wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In the downstream Raspberry Pi kernel we are using configfs to apply overlays
> at
> runtime, using a patchset from Pantelis that hasn't been accepted upstream
> yet.
> Apart from the occasional need to adapt to upstream changes, this has
tial_boot_params),
> fdt_totalsize(initial_boot_params),
> - 0);
> + false);
> }
>
> /**
>
Reviewed-by: Frank Rowand
Hi Saranova,
I'll try to address the other portions of this email that I
in my previous replies.
On 5/24/19 2:53 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 10:49 AM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>> On 5/23/19 6:01 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
>>> Add a gener
On 5/24/19 5:22 PM, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 5/24/19 2:53 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
>> On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 10:49 AM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>
>>> On 5/23/19 6:01 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
>
> < snip >
>
>>> Another flaw with this method is
On 5/24/19 2:53 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 10:49 AM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>> On 5/23/19 6:01 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
< snip >
>> Another flaw with this method is that existing device trees
>> will be broken after the kernel is mod
Hi Saravana,
On 5/24/19 2:53 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 10:49 AM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>> On 5/23/19 6:01 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
< snip >
>
> -Saravana
>
There were several different topics in your email. I am going to do
separat
On 5/24/19 11:21 AM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 10:56 AM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>> Hi Sarvana,
>>
>> I'm not reviewing patches 1-5 in any detail, given my reply to patch 0.
>>
>> But I had already skimmed through this patch befo
Hi Sarvana,
I'm not reviewing patches 1-5 in any detail, given my reply to patch 0.
But I had already skimmed through this patch before I received the
email for patch 0, so I want to make one generic comment below,
to give some feedback as you continue thinking through possible
implementations to
On 5/23/19 6:01 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> Add a generic "depends-on" property that allows specifying mandatory
> functional dependencies between devices. Add device-links after the
> devices are created (but before they are probed) by looking at this
> "depends-on" property.
>
> This property i
On 5/9/19 3:20 PM, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
>
>
> On 2019-05-09 3:42 p.m., Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>> On Thu, May 09, 2019 at 11:12:12AM -0700, Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>
>>> "My understanding is that the intent of KUnit is to avoid booting a
>>
On 5/8/19 6:44 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 05:58:49PM -0700, Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>> If KUnit is added to the kernel, and a subsystem that I am submitting
>> code for has chosen to use KUnit instead of kselftest, then yes, I do
>> *have* to
Hi Doug,
On 5/7/19 3:19 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 3:17 PM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>> On 5/6/19 4:58 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 2:10 PM Kees Cook wrote:
>>>>
>>
101 - 200 of 953 matches
Mail list logo
