On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 10:58:26PM +0200, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Stephen,
>
> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> > On 05/15/2014 02:39 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Stephen Warren
> >> wrote:
> >>> On 05/14/2014 11:56 PM,
On 16 May 2014 00:47, Stephen Warren wrote:
> This seems rather complex. Can't either the driver or the cpufreq core
> be responsible for all of the notifications? Otherwise, the logic gets
> rather complex, and spread between the core and the driver.
I do agree about that and that's why added
On 15 May 2014 23:43, Doug Anderson wrote:
> This will have the side effect of sending twice as many notifications.
> ...however it does allow for people registering for CPUFREQ
> notifications to be more generic...
That's not a side effect of this approach but the way platforms are
handling
On 15 May 2014 23:43, Doug Anderson diand...@chromium.org wrote:
This will have the side effect of sending twice as many notifications.
...however it does allow for people registering for CPUFREQ
notifications to be more generic...
That's not a side effect of this approach but the way
On 16 May 2014 00:47, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
This seems rather complex. Can't either the driver or the cpufreq core
be responsible for all of the notifications? Otherwise, the logic gets
rather complex, and spread between the core and the driver.
I do agree about that and
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 10:58:26PM +0200, Doug Anderson wrote:
Stephen,
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 05/15/2014 02:39 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org
wrote:
On
Stephen,
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 05/15/2014 02:39 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Stephen Warren
>> wrote:
>>> On 05/14/2014 11:56 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
Douglas Anderson, recently pointed out an interesting
On 05/15/2014 02:39 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Stephen Warren
> wrote:
>> On 05/14/2014 11:56 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>>> Douglas Anderson, recently pointed out an interesting problem due to which
>>> his
>>> udelay() was expiring earlier than it
Hi,
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 05/14/2014 11:56 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> Douglas Anderson, recently pointed out an interesting problem due to which
>> his
>> udelay() was expiring earlier than it should:
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/13/766
>>
>> While
On 05/14/2014 11:56 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Douglas Anderson, recently pointed out an interesting problem due to which his
> udelay() was expiring earlier than it should:
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/13/766
>
> While transitioning between frequencies few platforms may temporarily switch
> to
Viresh,
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 10:56 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Douglas Anderson, recently pointed out an interesting problem due to which his
> udelay() was expiring earlier than it should:
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/13/766
>
> While transitioning between frequencies few platforms may
Viresh,
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 10:56 PM, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
Douglas Anderson, recently pointed out an interesting problem due to which his
udelay() was expiring earlier than it should:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/13/766
While transitioning between frequencies few
On 05/14/2014 11:56 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
Douglas Anderson, recently pointed out an interesting problem due to which his
udelay() was expiring earlier than it should:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/13/766
While transitioning between frequencies few platforms may temporarily switch
to
a
Hi,
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 05/14/2014 11:56 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
Douglas Anderson, recently pointed out an interesting problem due to which
his
udelay() was expiring earlier than it should:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/13/766
On 05/15/2014 02:39 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org
wrote:
On 05/14/2014 11:56 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
Douglas Anderson, recently pointed out an interesting problem due to which
his
udelay() was expiring earlier than it
Stephen,
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 05/15/2014 02:39 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org
wrote:
On 05/14/2014 11:56 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
Douglas Anderson, recently
Douglas Anderson, recently pointed out an interesting problem due to which his
udelay() was expiring earlier than it should:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/13/766
While transitioning between frequencies few platforms may temporarily switch to
a stable frequency, waiting for the main PLL to
Douglas Anderson, recently pointed out an interesting problem due to which his
udelay() was expiring earlier than it should:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/13/766
While transitioning between frequencies few platforms may temporarily switch to
a stable frequency, waiting for the main PLL to
18 matches
Mail list logo
