On 8 April 2013 14:17, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
On 8 April 2013 13:47, Amit Daniel Kachhap amit.dan...@samsung.com wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
index f3f3b14..bce2195 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
+++ b/drivers
On 8 April 2013 14:45, Kukjin Kim kgene@samsung.com wrote:
Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
Well, I'm dropping it. Please merge via the Samsung tree.
OK, I will.
I got patch file from Viresh, and there is a sign from Rafael, but it should
be ack. So Rafael, let me use your ack on this patch
/cpufreq/cpufreq-exynos5440.txt
create mode 100644 drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c
With the resent of 1/4,
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More
by Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org
Changes since v2:
- moved clk_prepare_enable() and clk_disable_unprepare() from
fimd_probe() to fimd_clock() as suggested by Inki Dae
inki@samsung.com
Changes since v1:
- added error checking for clk_prepare_enable
On 5 April 2013 12:36, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
On 5 April 2013 12:18, Kukjin Kim kgene@samsung.com wrote:
Basically, this moving looks good to me, but should be re-worked based on
for-next of samsung tree because this touches too many samsung stuff so this
should
On 5 April 2013 12:18, Kukjin Kim kgene@samsung.com wrote:
Basically, this moving looks good to me, but should be re-worked based on
for-next of samsung tree because this touches too many samsung stuff so this
should be sent to upstream via samsung tree.
Hmm... Its already applied in
This patch moves cpufreq driver of Samsung's ARM based s3c24xx platform to
drivers/cpufreq.
Cc: Ben Dooks ben-li...@fluff.org
Cc: Kukjin Kim kgene@samsung.com
Cc: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org
On 31 March 2013 09:23, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
On 25 March 2013 15:41, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
This patch moves cpufreq driver of Samsung's ARM based s3c24xx platform to
drivers/cpufreq.
Cc: Ben Dooks ben-li...@fluff.org
Cc: Kukjin Kim kgene
On 1 April 2013 14:13, Vikas Sajjan vikas.saj...@linaro.org wrote:
While migrating to common clock framework (CCF), found that the FIMD clocks
s/found/we found/
were pulled down by the CCF.
If CCF finds any clock(s) which has NOT been claimed by any of the
drivers, then such clock(s) are
On 25 March 2013 15:41, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
This patch moves cpufreq driver of Samsung's ARM based s3c24xx platform to
drivers/cpufreq.
Cc: Ben Dooks ben-li...@fluff.org
Cc: Kukjin Kim kgene@samsung.com
Cc: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Viresh
On 28 March 2013 13:35, Amit Daniel Kachhap amit.dan...@samsung.com wrote:
Submitting the V5 version of exynos5440 cpufreq driver. This patchset
addresses
all the coding and design concerns raised especially by Viresh.
Changes in V5:
* Removed the unnecessary DT look up entry from
On 28 March 2013 13:35, Amit Daniel Kachhap amit.dan...@samsung.com wrote:
This patch adds dvfs support for exynos5440 SOC. This soc has 4 cores and
they scale at same frequency. The nature of exynos5440 clock controller is
different from previous exynos controllers so not using the common
On 28 March 2013 13:35, Amit Daniel Kachhap amit.dan...@samsung.com wrote:
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c
+static int exynos_cpufreq_cpu_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
+{
+ policy-cur = dvfs_info-cur_frequency;
+
This patch moves cpufreq driver of Samsung's ARM based s3c24xx platform to
drivers/cpufreq.
Cc: Ben Dooks ben-li...@fluff.org
Cc: Kukjin Kim kgene@samsung.com
Cc: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org
---
arch/arm/Kconfig
On 19 March 2013 15:29, Vikas Sajjan vikas.saj...@linaro.org wrote:
While migrating to common clock framework (CCF), found that the FIMD clocks
were pulled down by the CCF.
If CCF finds any clock(s) which has NOT been claimed by any of the
drivers, then such clock(s) are PULLed low by CCF.
This is what Russell told me a long time back:
Don't use Adding, Fixing, etc words as this work is not something, which is
already done.
So your subject should have been: cpufreq: exynos: Add cpufreq driver
for exynos5440
Fix it if you need another version, which i believe you do :)
On Tue, Mar
On 7 March 2013 12:13, Amit Daniel Kachhap amit.dan...@samsung.com wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c
b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c
+struct exynos_dvfs_data {
+ void __iomem *base;
+ struct resource *mem;
+ int irq;
+ struct clk
On 6 March 2013 13:35, amit kachhap amit.kach...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 6:48 AM, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
+static void exynos_cpufreq_work(struct work_struct *work)
+{
+ unsigned int cur_pstate, index;
+ struct cpufreq_policy *policy
On 2 March 2013 15:04, Amit Daniel Kachhap amit.dan...@samsung.com wrote:
This patch adds dvfs support for exynos5440 SOC. This soc has 4 cores and
they run at same frequency. The nature of exynos5440 clock controller is
different from previous exynos controllers so not using the common exynos
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 1:09 AM, Amit Daniel Kachhap
amit.dan...@samsung.com wrote:
This patch adds dvfs support for exynos5440 SOC. The nature of exynos5440
clock controller is different from previous exynos controllers so not using
the common exynos cpufreq framework. Also, the device tree
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 10:39 AM, Inderpal Singh
inderpal.si...@linaro.org wrote:
+#define DRIVER_NAMEexynos5440_dvfs
+static struct cpufreq_driver exynos_driver = {
+ .name = DRIVER_NAME,
+};
+
Since this driver is only for exynos5440, having the same names as
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 1:09 AM, Amit Daniel Kachhap
amit.dan...@samsung.com wrote:
This change is needed for adding different type of cpufreq driver
and support single binary image.
That's not sufficient, we need more description of the problem you faced.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send
, it makes it more
readable. :)
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 3:17 AM, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 1:09 AM, Amit Daniel Kachhap
+Required properties:
+- interrupts: Interrupt to know the completion of cpu frequency change.
+- cpufreq_tbl: Table of frequencies
On 8 February 2013 08:56, amit kachhap amit.kach...@gmail.com wrote:
+ dvfs_info-dvfs_init = true;
why do you need this ?
This is added to synchronize the interrupts.
How? You are setting it once in init() and not touching it afterwards. :)
Yes but during init also if interrupts
On 31 January 2013 20:15, Tomasz Figa t.f...@samsung.com wrote:
On Thursday 31 of January 2013 09:50:37 Viresh Kumar wrote:
+ policy-shared_type = CPUFREQ_SHARED_TYPE_ANY;
I couldn't understand the use of this change. Can you please explain ?
All cores on Exynos SoCs share
On 31 January 2013 20:34, Tomasz Figa t.f...@samsung.com wrote:
Well, the fact that it isn't used at the moment doesn't mean that it
shouldn't be set correctly. The field is present in the structure and has
a set of defined values - one of which should be selected. For example,
I can imagine
On 31 January 2013 21:37, Tomasz Figa t.f...@samsung.com wrote:
Hmm. Now as I think of it, there might be another confusing aspect:
Could you explain what sw coordination and any coordination mean?
I mean specifically cpufreq_policy.cpus and cpufreq_policy.related_cpus
masks.
Check this out:
On 31 January 2013 21:42, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
On 31 January 2013 21:37, Tomasz Figa t.f...@samsung.com wrote:
Hmm. Now as I think of it, there might be another confusing aspect:
Could you explain what sw coordination and any coordination mean?
I mean specifically
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Tomasz Figa t.f...@samsung.com wrote:
On Exynos SoCs all cores share the same frequency setting, so changing
frequency of one core will affect rest of cores.
This patch modifies the exynos-cpufreq driver to inform cpufreq core
about this behavior and broadcast
On 28 January 2013 17:56, Rafael J. Wysocki r...@sisk.pl wrote:
So here's a deal: I'll drop cpufreq: Simplify cpufreq_add_dev() for now and
you'll generate a new patch that won't cause the WARN_ON() to trigger. OK?
:(
Or what about set all cpus from policy-cpus into related_cpus in our core
= CPUFREQ_SHARED_TYPE_ANY;
+ cpumask_setall(policy-related_cpus);
cpumask_setall(policy-cpus);
This is required for all SMP systems.
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc in
the body
On 3/27/2012 9:49 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
These bindings came up in a discussion IRC today. I think it's rather bad that
we can't agree on a common way to name the properties for mmc. We have
bindings being proposed or already included from Anton, Stephen, Shawn,
Rajendra, Viresh, Lee and
,
.flags = IORESOURCE_MEM,
},
- .irq = {IRQ_APPL_GPIO, NO_IRQ},
+ .irq = {IRQ_APPL_GPIO},
}
};
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@st.com
--
viresh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc
},
-};
+AMBA_APB_DEVICE(spear3xx_uart, uart, 0, SPEAR3XX_ICM1_UART_BASE,
+ {SPEAR3XX_IRQ_UART}, NULL);
/* Do spear3xx familiy common initialization part here */
void __init spear3xx_init(void)
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@st.com
--
viresh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send
On 9/28/2011 11:20 AM, Alim Akhtar wrote:
Signed-off-by: Alim Akhtar alim.akh...@samsung.com
---
drivers/dma/amba-pl08x.c | 135
++
1 files changed, 112 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
It would be good if you can add pick some part from
On 9/28/2011 2:20 PM, Alim Akhtar wrote:
The main difference between Primecell PL080 and samsung variant is in
LLI control register bit [0:11] is reserved in case of samsung pl080
and one extra register is add to hold the transfer size at offset
0x10. The purpose of cctl1 is store the
201 - 236 of 236 matches
Mail list logo
