On Wednesday 09 October 2013 01:49 PM, Benoit Cousson wrote:
> Hi Rajendra,
>
> On 09/10/2013 09:37, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
>> On Wednesday 09 October 2013 12:54 PM, Paul Walmsley wrote:
>>> Hi Benoît, Rajendra,
>>>
>>> On Tue, 20 Aug 2013, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
>>>
Now that we have DT binding
Hi Rajendra,
On 09/10/2013 09:37, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
On Wednesday 09 October 2013 12:54 PM, Paul Walmsley wrote:
Hi Benoît, Rajendra,
On Tue, 20 Aug 2013, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
Now that we have DT bindings to specify which devices on the SoC should not
be reset or idled, get rid of the sa
On Wednesday 09 October 2013 12:54 PM, Paul Walmsley wrote:
> Hi Benoît, Rajendra,
>
> On Tue, 20 Aug 2013, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
>
>> Now that we have DT bindings to specify which devices on the SoC should not
>> be reset or idled, get rid of the same information existing as part of the
>> hwmod
Hi Benoît, Rajendra,
On Tue, 20 Aug 2013, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
> Now that we have DT bindings to specify which devices on the SoC should not
> be reset or idled, get rid of the same information existing as part of the
> hwmod data files and pass this info from DT instead.
>
> For GPMC, the HWMO
Now that we have DT bindings to specify which devices on the SoC should not
be reset or idled, get rid of the same information existing as part of the
hwmod data files and pass this info from DT instead.
For GPMC, the HWMOD_INIT_NO_RESET flag seems to be added in hwmod not due to
any errata around
