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
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. So that at
(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
(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 should be
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 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
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
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.
I
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-chip devices
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.
>>
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
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
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
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.
So
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 at least
On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 10:02 AM, Arnd Bergmann a...@arndb.de 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
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
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 about
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
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
22 matches
Mail list logo
