On 15/12/15 23:32, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 16.12.2015 01:35, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 21/10/15 11:10, Sudeep Holla wrote:
Though the keyboard and other driver will continue to support the legacy
"gpio-key,wakeup", "linux-keypad,wakeup" boolean property to enab
On 21/10/15 11:10, Sudeep Holla wrote:
Though the keyboard and other driver will continue to support the legacy
"gpio-key,wakeup", "linux,input-wakeup" boolean property to enable the
wakeup source, "wakeup-source" is the new standard binding.
This patch
On 21/10/15 11:10, Sudeep Holla wrote:
Though the keyboard and other driver will continue to support the legacy
"gpio-key,wakeup", "linux-keypad,wakeup" boolean property to enable the
wakeup source, "wakeup-source" is the new standard binding.
This patch
On 03/12/15 06:05, Viresh Kumar wrote:
[...]
@Sudeep: What would it take you to use cpufreq-dt for ARM's platforms
?
The main difference is that we get the OPPs from the firmware rather
than DT. We may just need to abstract that part and we should be able to
use it. I will have a look at
ith the unified
"wakeup-source" property in order to avoid any futher copy-paste
duplication.
Cc: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprow...@samsung.com>
Cc: Kukjin Kim <kg...@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.ho...@arm.com>
---
arch/arm
ith the unified
"wakeup-source" property in order to avoid any futher copy-paste
duplication.
Cc: Kukjin Kim <kg...@kernel.org>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlow...@samsung.com>
Cc: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.ho...@arm.com>
---
arch/ar
On 16/06/15 13:32, Tomasz Figa wrote:
2015-06-16 0:00 GMT+09:00 Javier Martinez Canillas
javier.marti...@collabora.co.uk:
On 06/15/2015 11:01 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
[...]
Agreed. But I would suggest also to add MASK_ON_SUSPEND and
set_irq_wake also and then you can restore iff it's non
On 15/06/15 08:46, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
[...]
Sudeep, so we may need something like $subject after all from Doug's
explanations since the combiner chip state is lost during a S2R. I know
that it adds more duplicated code (others irqchip drivers do the same)
and it may not scale
On 12/06/15 21:17, Doug Anderson wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 12:36 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas
javier.marti...@collabora.co.uk wrote:
registers are lost assuming the combiner was powered down, even the
status register will be lost and you will not know exactly the wakeup
reason right
On 15/06/15 16:00, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
Hello Sudeep,
On 06/15/2015 11:01 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 15/06/15 08:46, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
[...]
Sudeep, so we may need something like $subject after all from Doug's
explanations since the combiner chip state is lost
On 12/06/15 11:42, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 12.06.2015 19:10, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 12/06/15 06:43, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
The Exynos interrupt combiner IP loses its state when the SoC enters
into a low power state during a Suspend-to-RAM. This means that if a
IRQ is used
On 12/06/15 06:43, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
The Exynos interrupt combiner IP loses its state when the SoC enters
into a low power state during a Suspend-to-RAM. This means that if a
IRQ is used as a source, the interrupts for the devices are disabled
when the system is resumed from a
On 12/06/15 12:27, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
Hello Sudeep,
Thanks a lot for the feedback.
On 06/12/2015 12:10 PM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 12/06/15 06:43, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
The Exynos interrupt combiner IP loses its state when the SoC enters
into a low power state
Hi Abhilash,
On Wednesday 10 December 2014 10:46 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On Wednesday 10 December 2014 09:55 AM, Abhilash Kesavan wrote:
Hi Sudeep,
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 9:44 AM, Sudeep Holla sudeep.ho...@arm.com wrote:
Hi Abhilash,
On Wednesday 10 December 2014 09:31 AM, Abhilash
Hi Abhilash,
On Wednesday 10 December 2014 09:31 AM, Abhilash Kesavan wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 8:20 PM, Abhilash Kesavan a.kesa...@samsung.com wrote:
The arm-cci driver completes the probe sequence even if the cci node is
marked as disabled. Add a check in the driver to honour the
On Wednesday 10 December 2014 09:55 AM, Abhilash Kesavan wrote:
Hi Sudeep,
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 9:44 AM, Sudeep Holla sudeep.ho...@arm.com wrote:
Hi Abhilash,
On Wednesday 10 December 2014 09:31 AM, Abhilash Kesavan wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 8:20 PM, Abhilash Kesavan a.kesa
On 26/11/14 18:41, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
On Wed, 26 Nov 2014, Kevin Hilman wrote:
Abhilash Kesavan kesavan.abhil...@gmail.com writes:
Hi Kevin,
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 6:30 AM, Kevin Hilman khil...@kernel.org wrote:
[...]
More specifically, with only the loopback call to turn off CCI
On 20/11/14 03:48, Viresh Kumar wrote:
Oh, you are still alive? I thought you were about to get married :)
Just kidding !!
On 20 November 2014 00:58, Sudeep Holla sudeep.ho...@arm.com wrote:
Sorry for raising this issue always with Exynos cpufreq drivers. IMO the
bindings for arm-bL-cpufreq
On 20/10/14 12:41, Thomas Abraham wrote:
The new CPU clock type allows the use of generic CPUfreq drivers. So for
Exynos4210/5250, switch to using generic cpufreq driver. For Exynos5420,
which did not have CPUfreq driver support, enable the use of generic
CPUfreq driver.
Suggested-by: Tomasz
On 02/09/14 16:24, Naveen Krishna Chatradhi wrote:
The following compilation error occurs on 64-bit Exynos7 SoC:
drivers/irqchip/exynos-combiner.c: In function ‘combiner_irq_domain_map’:
drivers/irqchip/exynos-combiner.c:162:2: error: implicit declaration of
function ‘set_irq_flags’
On 30/05/14 19:15, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On 30.05.2014 20:05, Thomas Abraham wrote:
Hi Mark,
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 6:38 PM, Mark Rutland mark.rutl...@arm.com wrote:
Hi,
Apologies for being somewhat late w.r.t. review on this.
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 10:01:17AM +0100, Thomas Abraham
On 30/05/14 19:41, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On 30.05.2014 20:38, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 30/05/14 19:15, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On 30.05.2014 20:05, Thomas Abraham wrote:
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 6:38 PM, Mark Rutland mark.rutl...@arm.com
wrote:
[snip]
Why are these in both operating-points
On 14/05/14 15:03, Thomas Abraham wrote:
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 6:41 PM, Heiko Stübner he...@sntech.de wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 14. Mai 2014, 18:35:29 schrieb Viresh Kumar:
On 14 May 2014 18:20, Arnd Bergmann a...@arndb.de wrote:
Could we please come up with a way to probe this from DT in the
On 14/05/14 02:03, Thomas Abraham wrote:
From: Thomas Abraham thomas...@samsung.com
Add a new optional boost-frequency binding for specifying the frequencies
usable in boost mode.
Cc: Nishanth Menon n...@ti.com
Cc: Lukasz Majewski l.majew...@samsung.com
Cc: Rob Herring robh...@kernel.org
Cc:
On 08/02/14 05:10, Thomas Abraham wrote:
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 9:31 PM, Sudeep Holla sudeep.ho...@arm.com wrote:
On 07/02/14 15:19, Thomas Abraham wrote:
From: Thomas Abraham thomas...@samsung.com
Commit 6f19efc0 (cpufreq: Add boost frequency support in core) adds
support for CPU boost mode
On 08/02/14 06:47, Thomas Abraham wrote:
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Sudeep Holla sudeep.ho...@arm.com wrote:
On 07/02/14 17:37, Nishanth Menon wrote:
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Sudeep Holla sudeep.ho...@arm.com wrote:
[...]
Yes I think its counter-intuitive as it's visible
On 10/02/14 07:38, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
Hi Thomas, Sudeep,
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Sudeep Holla sudeep.ho...@arm.com
wrote:
On 07/02/14 17:37, Nishanth Menon wrote:
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Sudeep Holla
sudeep.ho...@arm.com wrote:
[...]
Yes I think its counter
On 10/02/14 07:53, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
Hi Thomas, Sudeep,
On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 1:11 AM, Nishanth Menon n...@ti.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Sudeep Holla
sudeep.ho...@arm.com wrote:
On 07/02/14 17:37, Nishanth Menon wrote:
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Sudeep Holla
On 07/02/14 15:19, Thomas Abraham wrote:
From: Thomas Abraham thomas...@samsung.com
Add a new optional boost-frequency binding for specifying the frequencies
usable in boost mode.
Cc: Nishanth Menon n...@ti.com
Cc: Lukasz Majewski l.majew...@samsung.com
Cc: Rob Herring robh...@kernel.org
On 07/02/14 16:15, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 07/02/14 15:19, Thomas Abraham wrote:
From: Thomas Abraham thomas...@samsung.com
Add a new optional boost-frequency binding for specifying the frequencies
usable in boost mode.
Cc: Nishanth Menon n...@ti.com
Cc: Lukasz Majewski l.majew
On 07/02/14 15:55, Thomas Abraham wrote:
From: Thomas Abraham thomas...@samsung.com
For all Exynos based platforms, add CPU nodes, operating points and cpu
clock data for migrating from Exynos specific cpufreq driver to using
generic cpufreq-cpu0 driver.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Abraham
On 07/02/14 16:43, Nishanth Menon wrote:
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 10:28 AM, Sudeep Holla sudeep.ho...@arm.com wrote:
On 07/02/14 16:15, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 07/02/14 15:19, Thomas Abraham wrote:
From: Thomas Abraham thomas...@samsung.com
Add a new optional boost-frequency binding
On 07/02/14 15:19, Thomas Abraham wrote:
From: Thomas Abraham thomas...@samsung.com
Commit 6f19efc0 (cpufreq: Add boost frequency support in core) adds
support for CPU boost mode. This patch adds support for finding available
boost frequencies from device tree and marking them as usable in
33 matches
Mail list logo
