On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 07:09 +0100, ext Nilofer, Samreen wrote:
> Hi,
> Any more comments on this patch?
I'm not sure if enabling kernel options by default is a good thing.
Somehow I remember that enabling things by default is not looked kindly
at. Shouldn't they be enabled in the arch/arm/config
The kgdb invokes the poll_put_char and poll_get_char when communicating
with the host. This patch also changes the initialization order because the
kgdb will check at the very beginning, if there is a valid serial
driver.
Signed-off-by: Cosmin Cojocar
---
drivers/serial/Makefile |2 +-
On Sat, 20 Nov 2010, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Nov 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> > On Friday, November 19, 2010, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > This patch (as1431b) makes the synchronous runtime-PM interface
> > > suitable for use in interrupt handlers. Subsystems can call the new
> > > pm_ru
On Sat, 20 Nov 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, November 19, 2010, Alan Stern wrote:
> > This patch (as1431b) makes the synchronous runtime-PM interface
> > suitable for use in interrupt handlers. Subsystems can call the new
> > pm_runtime_irq_safe() function to tell the PM core that a
Felipe,
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 5:31 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> Hi Hari,
>
> On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 22:01 -0600, Kanigeri, Hari wrote:
>> Of course :), profiling was done before releasing this code and no
>> difference observed with or without blocking notifier. All the OMAP4
>
> would you share so
On Friday, November 19, 2010, Alan Stern wrote:
> This patch (as1431b) makes the synchronous runtime-PM interface
> suitable for use in interrupt handlers. Subsystems can call the new
> pm_runtime_irq_safe() function to tell the PM core that a device's
> runtime-PM callbacks should be invoked with
Hello.
On 19-11-2010 19:07, srin...@mistralsolutions.com wrote:
From: Srinath
AM3517/05 Craneboard has one EHCI interface on board using port1.
GPIO35 is used as power enable.
GPIO38 is used as port1 PHY reset.
Signed-off-by: Srinath
---
arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-am3517crane.c | 21
Hi Hari,
On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 22:01 -0600, Kanigeri, Hari wrote:
> Of course :), profiling was done before releasing this code and no
> difference observed with or without blocking notifier. All the OMAP4
would you share some numbers ?
> use cases are exercising this code. Just curious , are yo
> -Original Message-
> From: Måns Rullgård [mailto:m...@mansr.com]
> Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2010 12:02 AM
> To: Santosh Shilimkar
> Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org; n...@ti.com; m...@mansr.com;
> t...@atomide.com; khil...@deeprootsystems.com; linux-arm-
> ker...@lists.infradead.org
> S
> -Original Message-
> From: Nishanth Menon [mailto:n...@ti.com]
> Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2010 2:45 AM
> To: Kevin Hilman
> Cc: Santosh Shilimkar; linux-omap; Jean Pihet; Vishwanath Sripathy; Tony
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/13] OMAP3: PM: Deny MPU idle while saving secure
> RAM
>
> Kevi
> -Original Message-
> From: Kevin Hilman [mailto:khil...@deeprootsystems.com]
> Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2010 2:40 AM
> To: Nishanth Menon
> Cc: Santosh Shilimkar; linux-omap; Jean Pihet; Vishwanath Sripathy; Tony
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/13] OMAP3: PM: Deny MPU idle while saving secur
> -Original Message-
> From: linux-omap-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-omap-
> ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Nishanth Menon
> Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2010 3:07 AM
> To: Kevin Hilman
> Cc: linux-omap; Jean Pihet; Vishwanath Sripathy; Tony
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] OMAP3: O
12 matches
Mail list logo
