Hi Tero,
On Thursday 26 July 2012 11:57 PM, Tero Kristo wrote:
Yeah, this is definitely a problem.
As long as we have autodeps, everything is centralized around CPU
transitions anyways, so it makes sense to keep the accounting
centralized too.
I think as long as we have autodeps,
Hi Tero,
On Friday 27 July 2012 12:16 PM, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
However a quick test with just your latest usecounting series (without
any of my RFC patches) seems to make me think I am still missing
something.
If you see the counts below for usbhost and dss, they both seem to
go in and out of
On Thursday 26 July 2012 04:13 AM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
Tero Kristot-kri...@ti.com writes:
On Fri, 2012-07-20 at 13:38 +0530, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
On Friday 20 July 2012 12:55 PM, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Rajendra Nayakrna...@ti.com wrote:
On Thursday 26 July 2012 04:13 AM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
Tero Kristot-kri...@ti.com writes:
On Fri, 2012-07-20 at 13:38 +0530, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
On Friday 20 July 2012 12:55 PM, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Rajendra Nayakrna...@ti.com wrote:
Rajendra Nayak rna...@ti.com writes:
On Thursday 26 July 2012 04:13 AM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
Tero Kristot-kri...@ti.com writes:
On Fri, 2012-07-20 at 13:38 +0530, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
On Friday 20 July 2012 12:55 PM, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Rajendra
On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 10:44 -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
Rajendra Nayak rna...@ti.com writes:
On Thursday 26 July 2012 04:13 AM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
Tero Kristot-kri...@ti.com writes:
On Fri, 2012-07-20 at 13:38 +0530, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
On Friday 20 July 2012 12:55 PM, Shilimkar,
On Thu, 26 Jul 2012, Tero Kristo wrote:
On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 10:44 -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
Or, to get rid of autodeps. ;)
Whats the reason for having them anyway?
No one has yet posted tested patches to convert OMAP2/3 to use the IP
block-based clockdomain enable sequence. A few
Tero Kristo t-kri...@ti.com writes:
On Fri, 2012-07-20 at 13:38 +0530, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
On Friday 20 July 2012 12:55 PM, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Rajendra Nayakrna...@ti.com wrote:
pwrdm_pre_transition()/pwrdm_post_transition() have always been high
pwrdm_pre_transition()/pwrdm_post_transition() have always been high latency
operations done within cpuidle to do Powerdomain level book-keeping to know
what state transitions for different Powerdomains have been triggered.
This is also useful to do a restore-on-demand in some cases when we know
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Rajendra Nayak rna...@ti.com wrote:
pwrdm_pre_transition()/pwrdm_post_transition() have always been high latency
operations done within cpuidle to do Powerdomain level book-keeping to know
what state transitions for different Powerdomains have been triggered.
On Friday 20 July 2012 12:55 PM, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Rajendra Nayakrna...@ti.com wrote:
pwrdm_pre_transition()/pwrdm_post_transition() have always been high latency
operations done within cpuidle to do Powerdomain level book-keeping to know
what state
On Fri, 2012-07-20 at 13:38 +0530, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
On Friday 20 July 2012 12:55 PM, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Rajendra Nayakrna...@ti.com wrote:
pwrdm_pre_transition()/pwrdm_post_transition() have always been high
latency
operations done within
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Tero Kristo t-kri...@ti.com wrote:
On Fri, 2012-07-20 at 13:38 +0530, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
On Friday 20 July 2012 12:55 PM, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Rajendra Nayakrna...@ti.com
wrote:
13 matches
Mail list logo
