On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 05:52:54PM +, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
> On 19/03/15 17:38, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 19/03/15 17:32, Mark Rutland wrote:
> >> One more thing:
> >>
> >>> @@ -883,7 +894,11 @@ static inline const struct cci_pmu_model
> >>> *get_cci_model(struct platform_device
On 19/03/15 17:38, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 19/03/15 17:32, Mark Rutland wrote:
One more thing:
@@ -883,7 +894,11 @@ static inline const struct cci_pmu_model
*get_cci_model(struct platform_device *
pdev->dev.of_node);
if
On 19/03/15 17:32, Mark Rutland wrote:
One more thing:
@@ -883,7 +894,11 @@ static inline const struct cci_pmu_model
*get_cci_model(struct platform_device *
pdev->dev.of_node);
if (!match)
return NULL;
+
One more thing:
> @@ -883,7 +894,11 @@ static inline const struct cci_pmu_model
> *get_cci_model(struct platform_device *
> pdev->dev.of_node);
> if (!match)
> return NULL;
> + if (match->data)
> + return
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 09:51:41AM +, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
> From: "Suzuki K. Poulose"
>
> A minor change, fixed missplled 'DEPRECATED' in the dev_warn().
>
> Thanks
> Suzuki
>
> 8>
> Avoid secure transactions while probing the CCI PMU. The
> existing code makes use of the
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 09:51:41AM +, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
From: Suzuki K. Poulose suzuki.poul...@arm.com
A minor change, fixed missplled 'DEPRECATED' in the dev_warn().
Thanks
Suzuki
8
Avoid secure transactions while probing the CCI PMU. The
existing code makes use of
One more thing:
@@ -883,7 +894,11 @@ static inline const struct cci_pmu_model
*get_cci_model(struct platform_device *
pdev-dev.of_node);
if (!match)
return NULL;
+ if (match-data)
+ return
On 19/03/15 17:38, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 19/03/15 17:32, Mark Rutland wrote:
One more thing:
@@ -883,7 +894,11 @@ static inline const struct cci_pmu_model
*get_cci_model(struct platform_device *
pdev-dev.of_node);
if (!match)
On 19/03/15 17:32, Mark Rutland wrote:
One more thing:
@@ -883,7 +894,11 @@ static inline const struct cci_pmu_model
*get_cci_model(struct platform_device *
pdev-dev.of_node);
if (!match)
return NULL;
+ if
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 05:52:54PM +, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
On 19/03/15 17:38, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 19/03/15 17:32, Mark Rutland wrote:
One more thing:
@@ -883,7 +894,11 @@ static inline const struct cci_pmu_model
*get_cci_model(struct platform_device *
From: "Suzuki K. Poulose"
Avoid secure transactions while probing the CCI PMU. The
existing code makes use of the Peripheral ID2 (PID2) register
to determine the revision of the CCI400, which requires a
secure transaction. This puts a limitation on the usage of the
driver on systems running
From: Suzuki K. Poulose suzuki.poul...@arm.com
Avoid secure transactions while probing the CCI PMU. The
existing code makes use of the Peripheral ID2 (PID2) register
to determine the revision of the CCI400, which requires a
secure transaction. This puts a limitation on the usage of the
driver on
From: "Suzuki K. Poulose"
A minor change, fixed missplled 'DEPRECATED' in the dev_warn().
Thanks
Suzuki
8>
Avoid secure transactions while probing the CCI PMU. The
existing code makes use of the Peripheral ID2 (PID2) register
to determine the revision of the CCI400, which requires a
From: Suzuki K. Poulose suzuki.poul...@arm.com
A minor change, fixed missplled 'DEPRECATED' in the dev_warn().
Thanks
Suzuki
8
Avoid secure transactions while probing the CCI PMU. The
existing code makes use of the Peripheral ID2 (PID2) register
to determine the revision of the CCI400,
From: "Suzuki K. Poulose"
Avoid secure transactions while probing the CCI PMU. The
existing code makes use of the Peripheral ID2 (PID2) register
to determine the revision of the CCI400, which requires a
secure transaction. This puts a limitation on the usage of the
driver on systems running
From: Suzuki K. Poulose suzuki.poul...@arm.com
Avoid secure transactions while probing the CCI PMU. The
existing code makes use of the Peripheral ID2 (PID2) register
to determine the revision of the CCI400, which requires a
secure transaction. This puts a limitation on the usage of the
driver on
On 03/03/15 15:44, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 02/03/15 11:29, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
From: "Suzuki K. Poulose"
Avoid secure transactions while probing the CCI PMU. The
existing code makes use of the Peripheral ID2 (PID2) register
to determine the revision of the CCI400, which requires a
On 03/03/15 15:44, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 02/03/15 11:29, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
From: Suzuki K. Poulose suzuki.poul...@arm.com
Avoid secure transactions while probing the CCI PMU. The
existing code makes use of the Peripheral ID2 (PID2) register
to determine the revision of the CCI400,
On 02/03/15 11:29, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
From: "Suzuki K. Poulose"
Avoid secure transactions while probing the CCI PMU. The
existing code makes use of the Peripheral ID2 (PID2) register
to determine the revision of the CCI400, which requires a
secure transaction. This puts a limitation on
On 02/03/15 11:29, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
From: Suzuki K. Poulose suzuki.poul...@arm.com
Avoid secure transactions while probing the CCI PMU. The
existing code makes use of the Peripheral ID2 (PID2) register
to determine the revision of the CCI400, which requires a
secure transaction. This
From: "Suzuki K. Poulose"
Avoid secure transactions while probing the CCI PMU. The
existing code makes use of the Peripheral ID2 (PID2) register
to determine the revision of the CCI400, which requires a
secure transaction. This puts a limitation on the usage of the
driver on systems running
From: Suzuki K. Poulose suzuki.poul...@arm.com
Avoid secure transactions while probing the CCI PMU. The
existing code makes use of the Peripheral ID2 (PID2) register
to determine the revision of the CCI400, which requires a
secure transaction. This puts a limitation on the usage of the
driver on
22 matches
Mail list logo
