On Wednesday 16 March 2016 15:47:10 Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> I just had another look at the driver and I think there is a race
> condition for tpa6130a2_add_controls() and tpa6130a2_stereo_enable().
>
> As far as I can see both functions check for "tpa6130a2_client !=
> NULL". tpa6130a2_client
On Wednesday 16 March 2016 15:47:10 Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> I just had another look at the driver and I think there is a race
> condition for tpa6130a2_add_controls() and tpa6130a2_stereo_enable().
>
> As far as I can see both functions check for "tpa6130a2_client !=
> NULL". tpa6130a2_client
On 21.03.2016 21:34, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
On 21.03.2016 16:53, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
Hi Mark,
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 01:45:15PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 03:39:15PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
On 21.03.2016 13:45, Mark Brown wrote:
No, if the voltage is
On 21.03.2016 21:34, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
On 21.03.2016 16:53, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
Hi Mark,
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 01:45:15PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 03:39:15PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
On 21.03.2016 13:45, Mark Brown wrote:
No, if the voltage is
On 21.03.2016 16:53, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
Hi Mark,
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 01:45:15PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 03:39:15PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
On 21.03.2016 13:45, Mark Brown wrote:
No, if the voltage is variable we can't tell what the current
On 21.03.2016 16:53, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
Hi Mark,
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 01:45:15PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 03:39:15PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
On 21.03.2016 13:45, Mark Brown wrote:
No, if the voltage is variable we can't tell what the current
Hi Mark,
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 01:45:15PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 03:39:15PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> > On 21.03.2016 13:45, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > >No, if the voltage is variable we can't tell what the current
> > >constraints are without something telling
Hi Mark,
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 01:45:15PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 03:39:15PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> > On 21.03.2016 13:45, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > >No, if the voltage is variable we can't tell what the current
> > >constraints are without something telling
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 03:39:15PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> On 21.03.2016 13:45, Mark Brown wrote:
> >No, if the voltage is variable we can't tell what the current
> >constraints are without something telling us so we just don't vary the
> >voltage until we're told to do this. If we
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 03:39:15PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> On 21.03.2016 13:45, Mark Brown wrote:
> >No, if the voltage is variable we can't tell what the current
> >constraints are without something telling us so we just don't vary the
> >voltage until we're told to do this. If we
Hi,
On 21.03.2016 13:45, Mark Brown wrote:
No, if the voltage is variable we can't tell what the current
constraints are without something telling us so we just don't vary the
voltage until we're told to do this. If we immediately lower the
voltage to the minimum supported voltage that's
Hi,
On 21.03.2016 13:45, Mark Brown wrote:
No, if the voltage is variable we can't tell what the current
constraints are without something telling us so we just don't vary the
voltage until we're told to do this. If we immediately lower the
voltage to the minimum supported voltage that's
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 01:04:18AM +0100, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> Right thinking about it, the voltage must also be configured for the
> non always-on cases. So it's not a problem with the regulator
> framework, but with twl-regulator's probe function, that should take
> care of this.
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 01:04:18AM +0100, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> Right thinking about it, the voltage must also be configured for the
> non always-on cases. So it's not a problem with the regulator
> framework, but with twl-regulator's probe function, that should take
> care of this.
On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 06:17:04AM +0100, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 10:49:57AM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> > [7.215728] twl4030reg_is_enabled VMMC2 state 0x002e
> > [7.223205] twl4030reg_is_enabled VMMC2 state 0x002e
> Ok, so normal power up results
On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 06:17:04AM +0100, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 10:49:57AM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> > [7.215728] twl4030reg_is_enabled VMMC2 state 0x002e
> > [7.223205] twl4030reg_is_enabled VMMC2 state 0x002e
> Ok, so normal power up results
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 01:04:18AM +0100, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 09:43:11PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> > On 20.03.2016 07:17, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> > >On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 10:49:57AM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> > >>On 18.03.2016 17:04, Sebastian
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 01:04:18AM +0100, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 09:43:11PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> > On 20.03.2016 07:17, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> > >On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 10:49:57AM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> > >>On 18.03.2016 17:04, Sebastian
Hi,
On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 09:43:11PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> On 20.03.2016 07:17, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> >On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 10:49:57AM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> >>On 18.03.2016 17:04, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> >>>On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 03:45:26PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov
Hi,
On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 09:43:11PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> On 20.03.2016 07:17, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> >On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 10:49:57AM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> >>On 18.03.2016 17:04, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> >>>On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 03:45:26PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov
Hi
On 20.03.2016 07:17, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 10:49:57AM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
On 18.03.2016 17:04, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 03:45:26PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
On 18.03.2016 15:36, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
Regulator is
Hi
On 20.03.2016 07:17, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 10:49:57AM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
On 18.03.2016 17:04, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 03:45:26PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
On 18.03.2016 15:36, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
Regulator is
On 03/16/2016 08:21 PM, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 16.03.2016 16:47, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 02:33:19PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
>>> Hi! We found out that tpa6130a2 device is being initialized before
>>> i2c_2 bus is initialized. So that is reason
On 03/16/2016 08:21 PM, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 16.03.2016 16:47, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 02:33:19PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
>>> Hi! We found out that tpa6130a2 device is being initialized before
>>> i2c_2 bus is initialized. So that is reason
Hi,
On 18.03.2016 15:36, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
Have you tried the ideas from <20160317004917.GA6750@earth> (Date:
Thu, 17 Mar 2016 01:49:18 +0100)?
To the extend I understood them :)
Regulator is V28_A, which is always-on, so it is enabled no matter what
probe does. Anyway, I added a
Hi,
On 18.03.2016 15:36, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
Have you tried the ideas from <20160317004917.GA6750@earth> (Date:
Thu, 17 Mar 2016 01:49:18 +0100)?
To the extend I understood them :)
Regulator is V28_A, which is always-on, so it is enabled no matter what
probe does. Anyway, I added a
Hi,
On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 10:49:57AM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> On 18.03.2016 17:04, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> >On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 03:45:26PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> >>On 18.03.2016 15:36, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> >>Regulator is V28_A, which is always-on, so it is enabled
Hi,
On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 10:49:57AM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> On 18.03.2016 17:04, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> >On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 03:45:26PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> >>On 18.03.2016 15:36, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> >>Regulator is V28_A, which is always-on, so it is enabled
Hi,
On 17.03.2016 16:32, Tony Lindgren wrote:
Seems like a bug to me. My bets are on the deferred probe related
Peter posted.
I will test Peter's patch as well, however I really doubt internal
pull-ups enabled by Nokia to be a bug - keep in mind there are (or at
least were) enough devices
Hi,
On 17.03.2016 16:32, Tony Lindgren wrote:
Seems like a bug to me. My bets are on the deferred probe related
Peter posted.
I will test Peter's patch as well, however I really doubt internal
pull-ups enabled by Nokia to be a bug - keep in mind there are (or at
least were) enough devices
Hi,
On 17.03.2016 15:01, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Thursday 17 March 2016 09:56:22 Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
Hi,
Is camera on same bus as tpa? Maybe this is reason why camera is
non-functional too?
It doesn't matter, all the i2c busses are missing the pullups.
Will fix the board DTS file later
Hi,
On 17.03.2016 15:01, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Thursday 17 March 2016 09:56:22 Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
Hi,
Is camera on same bus as tpa? Maybe this is reason why camera is
non-functional too?
It doesn't matter, all the i2c busses are missing the pullups.
Will fix the board DTS file later
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 09:50:40PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> Jan 1 06:01:43 Nokia-N900 kernel: [6.947998] omap_i2c 4807.i2c: bus
> 1 rev3.3 at 2200 kHz
> Jan 1 06:01:43 Nokia-N900 kernel: [6.960632] tpa6130a2 2-0060: Write
> failed
> Jan 1 06:01:43 Nokia-N900 kernel: [
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 09:50:40PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> Jan 1 06:01:43 Nokia-N900 kernel: [6.947998] omap_i2c 4807.i2c: bus
> 1 rev3.3 at 2200 kHz
> Jan 1 06:01:43 Nokia-N900 kernel: [6.960632] tpa6130a2 2-0060: Write
> failed
> Jan 1 06:01:43 Nokia-N900 kernel: [
Hi,
can you try this:
diff --git a/sound/soc/codecs/tpa6130a2.c b/sound/soc/codecs/tpa6130a2.c
index 11d85c5c787a..7f5881bff5d9 100644
--- a/sound/soc/codecs/tpa6130a2.c
+++ b/sound/soc/codecs/tpa6130a2.c
@@ -386,6 +386,8 @@ static int tpa6130a2_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
Hi,
can you try this:
diff --git a/sound/soc/codecs/tpa6130a2.c b/sound/soc/codecs/tpa6130a2.c
index 11d85c5c787a..7f5881bff5d9 100644
--- a/sound/soc/codecs/tpa6130a2.c
+++ b/sound/soc/codecs/tpa6130a2.c
@@ -386,6 +386,8 @@ static int tpa6130a2_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
Hi! We found out that tpa6130a2 device is being initialized before i2c_2
bus is initialized. So that is reason why tpa6130a2 fails...
Any idea why kernel first try to initialize one i2c device even before
bus itself is initialized?
On Monday 14 March 2016 11:59:13 Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> Does
Hi! We found out that tpa6130a2 device is being initialized before i2c_2
bus is initialized. So that is reason why tpa6130a2 fails...
Any idea why kernel first try to initialize one i2c device even before
bus itself is initialized?
On Monday 14 March 2016 11:59:13 Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> Does
On Thursday 17 March 2016 09:56:22 Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 17.03.2016 02:49, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> >
> >mh both, the power gpio is turned off in tpa6130a2_power(0). I guess
> >if you don't see the problem during probe() everything works?
> >
> >I have another idea though: In
On Thursday 17 March 2016 09:56:22 Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 17.03.2016 02:49, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> >
> >mh both, the power gpio is turned off in tpa6130a2_power(0). I guess
> >if you don't see the problem during probe() everything works?
> >
> >I have another idea though: In
* Ivaylo Dimitrov [160317 06:11]:
> Hi,
>
> On 17.03.2016 15:01, Pali Rohár wrote:
> >On Thursday 17 March 2016 09:56:22 Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >
> >Is camera on same bus as tpa? Maybe this is reason why camera is
> >non-functional too?
> >
>
> It
* Ivaylo Dimitrov [160317 06:11]:
> Hi,
>
> On 17.03.2016 15:01, Pali Rohár wrote:
> >On Thursday 17 March 2016 09:56:22 Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >
> >Is camera on same bus as tpa? Maybe this is reason why camera is
> >non-functional too?
> >
>
> It doesn't matter, all the i2c
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 03:45:26PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> On 18.03.2016 15:36, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
>
> >Have you tried the ideas from <20160317004917.GA6750@earth> (Date:
> >Thu, 17 Mar 2016 01:49:18 +0100)?
> >
>
> To the extend I understood them :)
>
> Regulator is V28_A,
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 03:45:26PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> On 18.03.2016 15:36, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
>
> >Have you tried the ideas from <20160317004917.GA6750@earth> (Date:
> >Thu, 17 Mar 2016 01:49:18 +0100)?
> >
>
> To the extend I understood them :)
>
> Regulator is V28_A,
* Ivaylo Dimitrov [160317 06:51]:
> Hi,
>
> On 17.03.2016 15:33, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> >
> >Check the schematics. If the hardware has external pull-ups on a
> >line then don't enable the internal pull-ups. Otherwise both the
> >external and intenal pulls are
* Ivaylo Dimitrov [160317 06:51]:
> Hi,
>
> On 17.03.2016 15:33, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> >
> >Check the schematics. If the hardware has external pull-ups on a
> >line then don't enable the internal pull-ups. Otherwise both the
> >external and intenal pulls are parallel the pull value will be
>
On 03/17/16 19:26, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> Hi,
>
>>
>> can you try this:
>> diff --git a/sound/soc/codecs/tpa6130a2.c b/sound/soc/codecs/tpa6130a2.c
>> index 11d85c5c787a..7f5881bff5d9 100644
>> --- a/sound/soc/codecs/tpa6130a2.c
>> +++ b/sound/soc/codecs/tpa6130a2.c
>> @@ -386,6 +386,8 @@
On 03/17/16 19:26, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> Hi,
>
>>
>> can you try this:
>> diff --git a/sound/soc/codecs/tpa6130a2.c b/sound/soc/codecs/tpa6130a2.c
>> index 11d85c5c787a..7f5881bff5d9 100644
>> --- a/sound/soc/codecs/tpa6130a2.c
>> +++ b/sound/soc/codecs/tpa6130a2.c
>> @@ -386,6 +386,8 @@
Hi,
On 16.03.2016 20:32, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
No-no :) take a look on i2c-omap.c
r = i2c_add_numbered_adapter(adap);
here you see messages from tpa6130a2 (create i2c devices & probe if
drivers are ready)
if (r) {
dev_err(omap->dev, "failure adding
Hi,
On 16.03.2016 20:32, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
No-no :) take a look on i2c-omap.c
r = i2c_add_numbered_adapter(adap);
here you see messages from tpa6130a2 (create i2c devices & probe if
drivers are ready)
if (r) {
dev_err(omap->dev, "failure adding
Hi,
On 16.03.2016 16:47, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 02:33:19PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
Hi! We found out that tpa6130a2 device is being initialized before
i2c_2 bus is initialized. So that is reason why tpa6130a2 fails...
What do you mean by initialize? A call to
Hi,
On 16.03.2016 16:47, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 02:33:19PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
Hi! We found out that tpa6130a2 device is being initialized before
i2c_2 bus is initialized. So that is reason why tpa6130a2 fails...
What do you mean by initialize? A call to
Hi,
On 18.03.2016 17:04, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 03:45:26PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
On 18.03.2016 15:36, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
Regulator is V28_A, which is always-on, so it is enabled no matter what
probe does. Anyway, I added a various delays after
Hi,
On 18.03.2016 17:04, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 03:45:26PM +0200, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
On 18.03.2016 15:36, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
Regulator is V28_A, which is always-on, so it is enabled no matter what
probe does. Anyway, I added a various delays after
On 03/16/16 21:50, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 16.03.2016 20:32, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
>>
>> No-no :) take a look on i2c-omap.c
>>
>> r = i2c_add_numbered_adapter(adap);
>>
>> here you see messages from tpa6130a2 (create i2c devices & probe if
>> drivers are ready)
>>
>>
On 03/16/16 21:50, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 16.03.2016 20:32, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
>>
>> No-no :) take a look on i2c-omap.c
>>
>> r = i2c_add_numbered_adapter(adap);
>>
>> here you see messages from tpa6130a2 (create i2c devices & probe if
>> drivers are ready)
>>
>>
Hi,
On 17.03.2016 02:49, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
mh both, the power gpio is turned off in tpa6130a2_power(0). I guess
if you don't see the problem during probe() everything works?
I have another idea though: In opposit to the gpio, the regulator
may also be referenced by something
Hi,
On 17.03.2016 02:49, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
mh both, the power gpio is turned off in tpa6130a2_power(0). I guess
if you don't see the problem during probe() everything works?
I have another idea though: In opposit to the gpio, the regulator
may also be referenced by something
Hi
On Fri Mar 18 12:33:14 2016 Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
>
> But enabling the pull via DT for the i2c2 works?
>
No :(. I even migrated the driver to regmap - no gain. Maybe i2c bus is blocked
by another device held in reset. The next thing I am going to try is to
deassert
Hi
On Fri Mar 18 12:33:14 2016 Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
>
> But enabling the pull via DT for the i2c2 works?
>
No :(. I even migrated the driver to regmap - no gain. Maybe i2c bus is blocked
by another device held in reset. The next thing I am going to try is to
deassert reset/power gpios on
Hi,
On 17.03.2016 15:33, Tony Lindgren wrote:
Check the schematics. If the hardware has external pull-ups on a
line then don't enable the internal pull-ups. Otherwise both the
external and intenal pulls are parallel the pull value will be
wrong. My guess is that on n900 all the i2c lines have
Hi,
On 17.03.2016 15:33, Tony Lindgren wrote:
Check the schematics. If the hardware has external pull-ups on a
line then don't enable the internal pull-ups. Otherwise both the
external and intenal pulls are parallel the pull value will be
wrong. My guess is that on n900 all the i2c lines have
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 02:33:19PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
> Hi! We found out that tpa6130a2 device is being initialized before
> i2c_2 bus is initialized. So that is reason why tpa6130a2 fails...
What do you mean by initialize? A call to tpa6130a2_probe()? In that
case I wonder about
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 02:33:19PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
> Hi! We found out that tpa6130a2 device is being initialized before
> i2c_2 bus is initialized. So that is reason why tpa6130a2 fails...
What do you mean by initialize? A call to tpa6130a2_probe()? In that
case I wonder about
Hi,
On 18.03.2016 17:04, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
Did you by chance also test adding a delay after setting the power
gpio? According to the datasheet:
Start-up time from shutdown: typical 5ms
:)
if (data->power_gpio) {
dev_err(_client->dev,
" GPIO SET:
Hi,
On 18.03.2016 17:04, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
Did you by chance also test adding a delay after setting the power
gpio? According to the datasheet:
Start-up time from shutdown: typical 5ms
:)
if (data->power_gpio) {
dev_err(_client->dev,
" GPIO SET:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 03:13:49PM +0200, Ивайло Димитров wrote:
> On Fri Mar 18 12:33:14 2016 Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> > But enabling the pull via DT for the i2c2 works?
>
> No :(. I even migrated the driver to regmap - no gain. Maybe i2c
> bus is blocked by another device
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 03:13:49PM +0200, Ивайло Димитров wrote:
> On Fri Mar 18 12:33:14 2016 Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> > But enabling the pull via DT for the i2c2 works?
>
> No :(. I even migrated the driver to regmap - no gain. Maybe i2c
> bus is blocked by another device held in reset. The
Hi,
On 14.03.2016 11:59, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
Does the i2c communication breaks with DT _and_ non DT boot?
IIRC, there was the same problem with legacy boot as well, but because
there were tons of other problems, we did not investigate it :)
Regards,
Ivo
Hi,
On 14.03.2016 11:59, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
Does the i2c communication breaks with DT _and_ non DT boot?
IIRC, there was the same problem with legacy boot as well, but because
there were tons of other problems, we did not investigate it :)
Regards,
Ivo
On 2016-03-12 14:42, Pali Rohár wrote:
> Hi Sebastian! Commenting calling lp55xx_reset_device function did not
> helped. Still getting that error.
>
> Tony, Peter, Jarkko: can you reproduce this problem? I'm really stucked
> here... do not know where is problem or how to fix it. What we know
On 2016-03-12 14:42, Pali Rohár wrote:
> Hi Sebastian! Commenting calling lp55xx_reset_device function did not
> helped. Still getting that error.
>
> Tony, Peter, Jarkko: can you reproduce this problem? I'm really stucked
> here... do not know where is problem or how to fix it. What we know
On Sunday 06 March 2016 16:23:39 Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> Hi Pali,
>
> On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 12:34:12AM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > On Tuesday 04 August 2015 09:02:39 Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> > > On 08/03/2015 09:48 PM, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> > > > It is well possible that some regression got
On Sunday 06 March 2016 16:23:39 Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> Hi Pali,
>
> On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 12:34:12AM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > On Tuesday 04 August 2015 09:02:39 Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> > > On 08/03/2015 09:48 PM, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> > > > It is well possible that some regression got
On Tuesday 08 March 2016 07:45:32 Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 7.03.2016 13:59, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > ... That error occurs randomly, not
> > always. When I see it next time, I will try to comment that
> > function if it happens...
>
> IIRC it is easier to cause it by booting to stock
On Tuesday 08 March 2016 07:45:32 Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 7.03.2016 13:59, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > ... That error occurs randomly, not
> > always. When I see it next time, I will try to comment that
> > function if it happens...
>
> IIRC it is easier to cause it by booting to stock
Hi,
On 7.03.2016 13:59, Pali Rohár wrote:
... That error occurs randomly, not
always. When I see it next time, I will try to comment that function if
it happens...
IIRC it is easier to cause it by booting to stock kernel first and then
rebooting to mainline (without power-down in between)
Hi,
On 7.03.2016 13:59, Pali Rohár wrote:
... That error occurs randomly, not
always. When I see it next time, I will try to comment that function if
it happens...
IIRC it is easier to cause it by booting to stock kernel first and then
rebooting to mainline (without power-down in between)
On Sunday 06 March 2016 16:23:39 Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> Hi Pali,
>
> On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 12:34:12AM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > On Tuesday 04 August 2015 09:02:39 Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> > > On 08/03/2015 09:48 PM, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> > > > It is well possible that some regression got
On Sunday 06 March 2016 16:23:39 Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> Hi Pali,
>
> On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 12:34:12AM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > On Tuesday 04 August 2015 09:02:39 Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> > > On 08/03/2015 09:48 PM, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> > > > It is well possible that some regression got
Hi Pali,
On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 12:34:12AM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Tuesday 04 August 2015 09:02:39 Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> > On 08/03/2015 09:48 PM, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> > > It is well possible that some regression got introduced to
> > > TPA6130A2 I2C communication over the years
Hi Pali,
On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 12:34:12AM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Tuesday 04 August 2015 09:02:39 Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> > On 08/03/2015 09:48 PM, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> > > It is well possible that some regression got introduced to
> > > TPA6130A2 I2C communication over the years
On Tuesday 04 August 2015 09:02:39 Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> On 08/03/2015 09:48 PM, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> > It is well possible that some regression got introduced to
> > TPA6130A2 I2C communication over the years without nobody than you
> > now notices. We used to do QA back in Meego N900 days
On Tuesday 04 August 2015 09:02:39 Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> On 08/03/2015 09:48 PM, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> > It is well possible that some regression got introduced to
> > TPA6130A2 I2C communication over the years without nobody than you
> > now notices. We used to do QA back in Meego N900 days
On Friday 14 August 2015 22:46:49 Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > Maybe some power management problem? Something is not always
> > initialized correctly?
> >
> > I remember that there is some problem (maybe in NoLo - Nokia
> > bootloader) that sometimes chainloaded U-Boot (booted via NoLo) is
>
Hi!
> Maybe some power management problem? Something is not always initialized
> correctly?
>
> I remember that there is some problem (maybe in NoLo - Nokia bootloader)
> that sometimes chainloaded U-Boot (booted via NoLo) is not able to
> initialize mmc chip (all read operation fails). In
Hi!
Maybe some power management problem? Something is not always initialized
correctly?
I remember that there is some problem (maybe in NoLo - Nokia bootloader)
that sometimes chainloaded U-Boot (booted via NoLo) is not able to
initialize mmc chip (all read operation fails). In U-Boot I
On Friday 14 August 2015 22:46:49 Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
Maybe some power management problem? Something is not always
initialized correctly?
I remember that there is some problem (maybe in NoLo - Nokia
bootloader) that sometimes chainloaded U-Boot (booted via NoLo) is
not able to
On 08/03/2015 09:48 PM, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> It is well possible that some regression got introduced to TPA6130A2 I2C
> communication over the years without nobody than you now notices. We
> used to do QA back in Meego N900 days but that was pre 3.x kernels.
No major changes has been done to
On 08/03/2015 09:48 PM, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
It is well possible that some regression got introduced to TPA6130A2 I2C
communication over the years without nobody than you now notices. We
used to do QA back in Meego N900 days but that was pre 3.x kernels.
No major changes has been done to the
On Monday 03 August 2015 20:48:28 Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> On 08/03/2015 09:17 PM, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > On Monday 03 August 2015 20:03:16 Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> On 08/01/2015 01:18 PM, Pali Rohár wrote:
> >>> On Saturday 25 July 2015 15:17:13 Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> >>> Hello,
On 08/03/2015 09:17 PM, Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Monday 03 August 2015 20:03:16 Jarkko Nikula wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> On 08/01/2015 01:18 PM, Pali Rohár wrote:
>>> On Saturday 25 July 2015 15:17:13 Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
>>> Hello, your patch did not helped. Problem is still there...
>>
>> For me
Hi
On 08/01/2015 01:18 PM, Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Saturday 25 July 2015 15:17:13 Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
>> On 07/25/2015 12:28 PM, Pali Rohár wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> sometimes after rebooting Nokia N900 initializing alsa audio fails.
>>> Here output from dmesg log when it happen:
>>>
>>> [
On Monday 03 August 2015 20:03:16 Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> Hi
>
> On 08/01/2015 01:18 PM, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > On Saturday 25 July 2015 15:17:13 Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> >> On 07/25/2015 12:28 PM, Pali Rohár wrote:
> >>> Hello,
> >>>
> >>> sometimes after rebooting Nokia N900 initializing alsa
Hi
On 08/01/2015 01:18 PM, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Saturday 25 July 2015 15:17:13 Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
On 07/25/2015 12:28 PM, Pali Rohár wrote:
Hello,
sometimes after rebooting Nokia N900 initializing alsa audio fails.
Here output from dmesg log when it happen:
[6.925140] tpa6130a2
On 08/03/2015 09:17 PM, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Monday 03 August 2015 20:03:16 Jarkko Nikula wrote:
Hi
On 08/01/2015 01:18 PM, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Saturday 25 July 2015 15:17:13 Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
Hello, your patch did not helped. Problem is still there...
For me v4.2-rc5 works, i.e.
On Monday 03 August 2015 20:48:28 Jarkko Nikula wrote:
On 08/03/2015 09:17 PM, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Monday 03 August 2015 20:03:16 Jarkko Nikula wrote:
Hi
On 08/01/2015 01:18 PM, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Saturday 25 July 2015 15:17:13 Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
Hello, your patch did not
On Monday 03 August 2015 20:03:16 Jarkko Nikula wrote:
Hi
On 08/01/2015 01:18 PM, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Saturday 25 July 2015 15:17:13 Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
On 07/25/2015 12:28 PM, Pali Rohár wrote:
Hello,
sometimes after rebooting Nokia N900 initializing alsa audio
fails. Here
On Saturday 25 July 2015 15:17:13 Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> On 07/25/2015 12:28 PM, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > sometimes after rebooting Nokia N900 initializing alsa audio fails.
> > Here output from dmesg log when it happen:
> >
> > [6.925140] tpa6130a2 2-0060: Write failed
> >
On Saturday 25 July 2015 15:17:13 Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
On 07/25/2015 12:28 PM, Pali Rohár wrote:
Hello,
sometimes after rebooting Nokia N900 initializing alsa audio fails.
Here output from dmesg log when it happen:
[6.925140] tpa6130a2 2-0060: Write failed
[6.929534]
1 - 100 of 104 matches
Mail list logo