On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 06:57:18PM +0800, Li Yang wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 9:20 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
> >> > This looks to be a carbon copy of the vexpress pseudo-hotplug in
> >> > arch/arm/mach-vexpress/hotplug.c, which is obviously broken in the way
> >> > you describe above. Perhaps
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 9:20 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
>> > This looks to be a carbon copy of the vexpress pseudo-hotplug in
>> > arch/arm/mach-vexpress/hotplug.c, which is obviously broken in the way
>> > you describe above. Perhaps we should go about ripping that out?
>>
>> The Versatile Express
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 9:20 PM, Mark Rutland mark.rutl...@arm.com wrote:
This looks to be a carbon copy of the vexpress pseudo-hotplug in
arch/arm/mach-vexpress/hotplug.c, which is obviously broken in the way
you describe above. Perhaps we should go about ripping that out?
The Versatile
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 06:57:18PM +0800, Li Yang wrote:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 9:20 PM, Mark Rutland mark.rutl...@arm.com wrote:
This looks to be a carbon copy of the vexpress pseudo-hotplug in
arch/arm/mach-vexpress/hotplug.c, which is obviously broken in the way
you describe above.
> > This looks to be a carbon copy of the vexpress pseudo-hotplug in
> > arch/arm/mach-vexpress/hotplug.c, which is obviously broken in the way
> > you describe above. Perhaps we should go about ripping that out?
>
> The Versatile Express does not support suspend so the only problem case
> is
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 01:46:14PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 01:20:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 07:25:01PM +0800, Chenhui Zhao wrote:
> > > +static inline void ls1_do_lowpower(unsigned int cpu, int *spurious)
> > > +{
> > > + /*
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 01:20:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 07:25:01PM +0800, Chenhui Zhao wrote:
> > +static inline void ls1_do_lowpower(unsigned int cpu, int *spurious)
> > +{
> > + /*
> > +* there is no power-control hardware on this platform, so
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 07:25:01PM +0800, Chenhui Zhao wrote:
> +static inline void ls1_do_lowpower(unsigned int cpu, int *spurious)
> +{
> + /*
> + * there is no power-control hardware on this platform, so all
> + * we can do is put the core into WFI; this is safe as the calling
> +
From: Zhang Zhuoyu
This implements CPU hotplug for ls1. When cpu is down, it will be put
in WFI state. When cpu is up, it will be waked by a IPI interrupt and
reinitialized.
Signed-off-by: Zhang Zhuoyu
Signed-off-by: Chenhui Zhao
---
arch/arm/mach-imx/common.h |4 ++
From: Zhang Zhuoyu zhuoyu.zh...@freescale.com
This implements CPU hotplug for ls1. When cpu is down, it will be put
in WFI state. When cpu is up, it will be waked by a IPI interrupt and
reinitialized.
Signed-off-by: Zhang Zhuoyu zhuoyu.zh...@freescale.com
Signed-off-by: Chenhui Zhao
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 07:25:01PM +0800, Chenhui Zhao wrote:
+static inline void ls1_do_lowpower(unsigned int cpu, int *spurious)
+{
+ /*
+ * there is no power-control hardware on this platform, so all
+ * we can do is put the core into WFI; this is safe as the calling
+
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 01:20:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 07:25:01PM +0800, Chenhui Zhao wrote:
+static inline void ls1_do_lowpower(unsigned int cpu, int *spurious)
+{
+ /*
+* there is no power-control hardware on this platform, so all
+
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 01:46:14PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 01:20:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 07:25:01PM +0800, Chenhui Zhao wrote:
+static inline void ls1_do_lowpower(unsigned int cpu, int *spurious)
+{
+ /*
+ *
This looks to be a carbon copy of the vexpress pseudo-hotplug in
arch/arm/mach-vexpress/hotplug.c, which is obviously broken in the way
you describe above. Perhaps we should go about ripping that out?
The Versatile Express does not support suspend so the only problem case
is kexec.
14 matches
Mail list logo
