On 02/23/2014 11:43 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 20 February 2014 23:10, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> Well, except that still leaves a bunch of errors in the kernel log, and
>> I have to remember to ignore them:-/
>
> Just for few releases, before this patchset goes in.
>
>> It'd be nice if the
On 02/23/2014 11:43 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 20 February 2014 23:10, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
Well, except that still leaves a bunch of errors in the kernel log, and
I have to remember to ignore them:-/
Just for few releases, before this patchset goes in.
It'd be nice
On 20 February 2014 23:10, Stephen Warren wrote:
> Well, except that still leaves a bunch of errors in the kernel log, and
> I have to remember to ignore them:-/
Just for few releases, before this patchset goes in.
> It'd be nice if the cpufreq core didn't keep changing its behaviour and
>
On 20 February 2014 23:10, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
Well, except that still leaves a bunch of errors in the kernel log, and
I have to remember to ignore them:-/
Just for few releases, before this patchset goes in.
It'd be nice if the cpufreq core didn't keep changing its
On 02/19/2014 06:50 PM, Linaro wrote:
>
>
>> On 20-Feb-2014, at 7:19 am, Linaro wrote:
>>
>>
>>
On 19-Feb-2014, at 10:56 pm, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 02/18/2014 09:15 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> On 19-Feb-2014 1:48 AM, "Stephen Warren" wrote:
>>
>>> On 02/17/2014
On 02/19/2014 06:50 PM, Linaro wrote:
On 20-Feb-2014, at 7:19 am, Linaro viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
On 19-Feb-2014, at 10:56 pm, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 02/18/2014 09:15 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 19-Feb-2014 1:48 AM, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org
> On 20-Feb-2014, at 7:19 am, Linaro wrote:
>
>
>
>>> On 19-Feb-2014, at 10:56 pm, Stephen Warren wrote:
>>>
On 02/18/2014 09:15 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 19-Feb-2014 1:48 AM, "Stephen Warren" wrote:
>
>> On 02/17/2014 02:20 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> On 15
> On 19-Feb-2014, at 10:56 pm, Stephen Warren wrote:
>
>> On 02/18/2014 09:15 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>>> On 19-Feb-2014 1:48 AM, "Stephen Warren" wrote:
>>>
On 02/17/2014 02:20 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 15 February 2014 05:33, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 02/14/2014 03:23 PM,
On 02/18/2014 09:15 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 19-Feb-2014 1:48 AM, "Stephen Warren" wrote:
>>
>> On 02/17/2014 02:20 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>>> On 15 February 2014 05:33, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 02/14/2014 03:23 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>
> Well, it would be good to verify
On 02/18/2014 09:15 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 19-Feb-2014 1:48 AM, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 02/17/2014 02:20 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 15 February 2014 05:33, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 02/14/2014 03:23 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
Well, it would
On 19-Feb-2014, at 10:56 pm, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 02/18/2014 09:15 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 19-Feb-2014 1:48 AM, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 02/17/2014 02:20 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 15 February 2014 05:33, Stephen Warren
On 20-Feb-2014, at 7:19 am, Linaro viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
On 19-Feb-2014, at 10:56 pm, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 02/18/2014 09:15 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 19-Feb-2014 1:48 AM, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 02/17/2014 02:20 AM, Viresh
On 19-Feb-2014 1:48 AM, "Stephen Warren" wrote:
>
> On 02/17/2014 02:20 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 15 February 2014 05:33, Stephen Warren wrote:
> >> On 02/14/2014 03:23 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> >>> Well, it would be good to verify which part, then.
> >>
> >> Patch 2/7 appears to
On 02/16/2014 11:02 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 15 February 2014 01:52, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> BTW, I also happened to test these on a Tegra114 system, on which there
>> is no cpufreq driver, and this series (applied on top of commit
>> 9398a10cd964 Merge tag 'regulator-v3.14-rc2') causes the
On 02/17/2014 02:20 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 15 February 2014 05:33, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 02/14/2014 03:23 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
>>> Well, it would be good to verify which part, then.
>>
>> Patch 2/7 appears to stop that message from being printed during
>> suspend, and
On 02/17/2014 02:20 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 15 February 2014 05:33, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 02/14/2014 03:23 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
Well, it would be good to verify which part, then.
Patch 2/7 appears to stop that message from being printed during
suspend,
On 02/16/2014 11:02 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 15 February 2014 01:52, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
BTW, I also happened to test these on a Tegra114 system, on which there
is no cpufreq driver, and this series (applied on top of commit
9398a10cd964 Merge tag
On 19-Feb-2014 1:48 AM, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 02/17/2014 02:20 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 15 February 2014 05:33, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 02/14/2014 03:23 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
Well, it would be good to verify which part, then.
On 15 February 2014 05:33, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 02/14/2014 03:23 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> Well, it would be good to verify which part, then.
>
> Patch 2/7 appears to stop that message from being printed during
> suspend, and perhaps reduce the number of times it's printed during
>
On 15 February 2014 05:33, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 02/14/2014 03:23 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
Well, it would be good to verify which part, then.
Patch 2/7 appears to stop that message from being printed during
suspend, and perhaps reduce the number of times it's
On 15 February 2014 01:12, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 02/12/2014 11:50 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> This patchset creates/calls cpufreq suspend/resume callbacks from
>> dpm_{suspend|resume}()
>> for handling suspend/resume of cpufreq governors and core.
>
> Are these patches for 3.14 or 3.15?
On 15 February 2014 01:52, Stephen Warren wrote:
> BTW, I also happened to test these on a Tegra114 system, on which there
> is no cpufreq driver, and this series (applied on top of commit
> 9398a10cd964 Merge tag 'regulator-v3.14-rc2') causes the following
> during suspend:
Ahh, that's a
On 15 February 2014 01:52, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
BTW, I also happened to test these on a Tegra114 system, on which there
is no cpufreq driver, and this series (applied on top of commit
9398a10cd964 Merge tag 'regulator-v3.14-rc2') causes the following
during suspend:
On 15 February 2014 01:12, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 02/12/2014 11:50 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
This patchset creates/calls cpufreq suspend/resume callbacks from
dpm_{suspend|resume}()
for handling suspend/resume of cpufreq governors and core.
Are these patches for 3.14
On 02/14/2014 03:23 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, February 14, 2014 12:42:53 PM Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 02/12/2014 11:50 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>>> This patchset creates/calls cpufreq suspend/resume callbacks from
>>> dpm_{suspend|resume}()
>>> for handling suspend/resume of
On Friday, February 14, 2014 12:42:53 PM Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 02/12/2014 11:50 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > This patchset creates/calls cpufreq suspend/resume callbacks from
> > dpm_{suspend|resume}()
> > for handling suspend/resume of cpufreq governors and core.
>
> Are these patches for
On 02/14/2014 12:42 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 02/12/2014 11:50 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> This patchset creates/calls cpufreq suspend/resume callbacks from
>> dpm_{suspend|resume}()
>> for handling suspend/resume of cpufreq governors and core.
BTW, I also happened to test these on a
On 02/12/2014 11:50 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> This patchset creates/calls cpufreq suspend/resume callbacks from
> dpm_{suspend|resume}()
> for handling suspend/resume of cpufreq governors and core.
Are these patches for 3.14 or 3.15?
I ask because I just tested Linus's master from a few days
On 02/12/2014 11:50 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
This patchset creates/calls cpufreq suspend/resume callbacks from
dpm_{suspend|resume}()
for handling suspend/resume of cpufreq governors and core.
Are these patches for 3.14 or 3.15?
I ask because I just tested Linus's master from a few days back
On 02/14/2014 12:42 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 02/12/2014 11:50 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
This patchset creates/calls cpufreq suspend/resume callbacks from
dpm_{suspend|resume}()
for handling suspend/resume of cpufreq governors and core.
BTW, I also happened to test these on a Tegra114
On Friday, February 14, 2014 12:42:53 PM Stephen Warren wrote:
On 02/12/2014 11:50 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
This patchset creates/calls cpufreq suspend/resume callbacks from
dpm_{suspend|resume}()
for handling suspend/resume of cpufreq governors and core.
Are these patches for 3.14 or
On 02/14/2014 03:23 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Friday, February 14, 2014 12:42:53 PM Stephen Warren wrote:
On 02/12/2014 11:50 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
This patchset creates/calls cpufreq suspend/resume callbacks from
dpm_{suspend|resume}()
for handling suspend/resume of cpufreq
This patchset creates/calls cpufreq suspend/resume callbacks from
dpm_{suspend|resume}()
for handling suspend/resume of cpufreq governors and core.
There are multiple problems that are fixed by this patch:
- Nishanth Menon (TI) found an interesting problem on his platform, OMAP. His
board
This patchset creates/calls cpufreq suspend/resume callbacks from
dpm_{suspend|resume}()
for handling suspend/resume of cpufreq governors and core.
There are multiple problems that are fixed by this patch:
- Nishanth Menon (TI) found an interesting problem on his platform, OMAP. His
board
34 matches
Mail list logo
