On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 11:17 PM Hans de Goede wrote:
>
> Add a getter for the acpi_gbl_reduced_hardware variable so that modules
> can check if they are running on an ACPI reduced-hw platform or not.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede
> ---
> drivers/acpi/utils.c| 11 +++
> include/acp
On Wed, Apr 7, 2021 at 7:43 PM Hans de Goede wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 4/7/21 7:13 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 11:17 PM Hans de Goede wrote:
> >>
> >> Add a getter for the acpi_gbl_reduced_hardware variable so that modules
> >
On Wed, Apr 7, 2021 at 7:58 PM Hans de Goede wrote:
>
> Add a getter for the acpi_gbl_reduced_hardware variable so that modules
> can check if they are running on an ACPI reduced-hw platform or not.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> - Use EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL instead of EXPOR
On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 3:04 PM Vincent Guittot
wrote:
>
> Hi Tvrtko,
>
> On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 13:32, Tvrtko Ursulin
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 21/12/2018 13:26, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > > On Fri, 21 Dec 2018 at 12:33, Tvrtko Ursulin
>
> [snip]
>
> > >>
> > >> If it is always monotonic, then wors
On Monday, January 7, 2019 3:21:49 PM CET Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 3:04 PM Vincent Guittot
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Tvrtko,
> >
> > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 at 13:32, Tvrtko Ursulin
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On
On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 11:16 PM Guenter Roeck wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 11:33:56AM +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > From: Thara Gopinath
> >
> > This patch replaces jiffies based accounting for runtime_active_time
> > and runtime_suspended_time with ktime base accounting. This makes th
On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 11:53 AM Vincent Guittot
wrote:
>
> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 11:42, Vincent Guittot
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Guenter,
> >
> > Le Thursday 17 Jan 2019 à 14:16:28 (-0800), Guenter Roeck a écrit :
> > > On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 11:33:56AM +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > > > From: T
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 4:17 PM Vincent Guittot
wrote:
>
> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 13:08, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> >
> > On 1/18/19 3:05 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 11:53 AM Vincent Guittot
> > > wrote:
> > >>
>
On 4/9/2019 8:29 AM, Anshuman Gupta wrote:
There were few system hung observed while running i915_pm_rpm igt test.
FDO https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=108840
Root cause is believed to due to page fault in ACPI idle driver.
(FDO comment 18).
It has been suggested by Daniel Vetter to d
(v1 code)
> Signed-off-by: Ramalingam C (v1 commit message)
> Cc: Ramalingam C
> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman
> Cc: Russell King
> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki
> Cc: Jaroslav Kysela
> Cc: Takashi Iwai
> Cc: Rodrigo Vivi
> Cc: Jani Nikula
On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 11:40 PM Daniel Vetter wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 11:57:04PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > ) On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 5:46 PM Daniel Vetter
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Component framework is extended to support multiple compone
ove redundant "This" from kerneldoc (also in the previous patch)
> - Streamline the logic in find_component() a bit.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter (v1 code)
> Signed-off-by: Ramalingam C (v1 commit message)
> Cc: Ramalingam C
> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman
> Cc: R
On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 12:05 PM Mika Westerberg
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 11:48:35AM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> > > > +#include
> > >
> > > Why is this include needed?
> >
> > It is no longer needed in v4, since the parsing of the raw
> > MIPI sequence data (which needed this include
On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 3:22 PM Vincent Guittot
wrote:
>
> On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 at 15:36, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 at 15:22, Vincent Guittot
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > With jiffies been replaced by raw ns in PM core accounting, 915 driver is
> > > updated to use this new time in
On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 10:58 AM Vincent Guittot
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 18 Dec 2018 at 10:57, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 3:22 PM Vincent Guittot
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 at 15:36, Ulf Hansson wrote:
&g
> 0001
> [12301.899295] RBP: 5612a1abf7c0 R08: 000a R09:
> 5612a1c46730
> [12301.899301] R10: 000a R11: 0246 R12:
> 000d
> [12301.899308] R13: 0001 R14: 7f452af4a740 R15:
>
I:
> > 0001
> > [12301.899295] RBP: 5612a1abf7c0 R08: 000a R09:
> > 5612a1c46730
> > [12301.899301] R10: 000a R11: 0246 R12:
> > 000d
> > [12301.899308] R13: 0001 R14: 7f452af4a
12301.899273] RSP: 002b:7ffceafa6918 EFLAGS: 0246 ORIG_RAX:
> > > 0001
> > > [12301.899282] RAX: ffda RBX: 000d RCX:
> > > 7f452ac7f7a4
> > > [12301.899288] RDX: 000d RSI: 00005612a1abf7c0 RDI:
>
:
> 000d
>
> Locking around I've noticed that usb and i2c already handle similar
> recursion problems, where a sysfs file can unbind the same type of
> sysfs somewhere else in the hierarchy. Relevant commits are:
>
> commit 356c05d58af05d582e634b54b40050c73609617b
> Author: Alan Ste
On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 11:03 PM Ulf Hansson wrote:
>
> On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 at 15:17, Vincent Guittot
> wrote:
> >
> > From: Thara Gopinath
> >
> > This patch replaces jiffies based accounting for runtime_active_time
> > and runtime_suspended_time with ktime base accounting. This makes the
> > r
On 12/16/2021 2:27 PM, Thomas Hellström wrote:
Hi, Rafael,
On 11/4/21 18:26, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
It is generally unsafe to call put_device() with dpm_list_mtx held,
because the given device's release routine may carry out an action
depending on that lock which then may deadlock, so m
he "Other issues" section of
> the refactor RFC (resulting in patches 15-29 which are new in v2).
>
> Please review and test! I hope to be able to make an immutable branch
> based on 5.20-rc1 + this series available for merging into the various
> touched subsystems once 5.20-
Len Brown
> Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin"
> Cc: Miguel Ojeda
> Cc: Mike Rapoport
> Cc: Nick Desaulniers
> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki"
> Cc: Rasmus Villemoes
> Cc: Rodrigo Vivi
> Cc: Russell King
> Cc: Somnath Kotur
> Cc: Sriharsha Basavapatna
&g
On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 8:24 PM Gustavo A. R. Silva
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 09:19:29PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 01:21:10PM -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 10:17:40AM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at
er depending on the VBT bit, instead of the i915 driver
> relying on a "pwm_backlight" lookup getting registered which magically
> points to the right controller.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede
Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki
Or please let me know if you want me to take the who
On Wednesday, March 11, 2020 8:23:19 PM CET Francisco Jerez wrote:
> The purpose of this PM QoS limit is to give device drivers additional
> control over the latency/energy efficiency trade-off made by the PM
> subsystem (particularly the CPUFREQ governor). It allows device
> drivers to set a lowe
On Tuesday, March 10, 2020 10:41:57 PM CET Francisco Jerez wrote:
> This reverts commit c4f3f70cacba2fa19545389a12d09b606d2ad1cf. A
> future commit will introduce a new update_util implementation, so the
> pstate_funcs table entry is going to be useful.
This basically means that you want to intro
On Tuesday, March 10, 2020 10:41:58 PM CET Francisco Jerez wrote:
> The goal of the helper code introduced here is to compute two
> informational data structures: struct vlp_input_stats aggregating
> various scheduling and PM statistics gathered in every call of the
> update_util() hook, and struct
On Tuesday, March 10, 2020 10:41:59 PM CET Francisco Jerez wrote:
> The function introduced here calculates a P-state range derived from
> the statistics computed in the previous patch which will be used to
> drive the HWP P-state range or (if HWP is not available) as basis for
> some additional ke
On Tuesday, March 10, 2020 10:42:01 PM CET Francisco Jerez wrote:
> For the moment the VLP controller is only enabled on ICL platforms
> other than server FADT profiles in order to reduce the validation
> effort of the initial submission. It should work on any other
> processors that support HWP t
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki"
Rename DPM_FLAG_NEVER_SKIP to DPM_FLAG_NO_DIRECT_COMPLETE which
matches its purpose more closely.
No functional impact.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki
---
Documentation/driver-api/pm/devices.rst| 6 +++---
Documentation/power/pci.rst
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki"
Rename DPM_FLAG_NEVER_SKIP to DPM_FLAG_NO_DIRECT_COMPLETE which
matches its purpose more closely.
No functional impact.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki
Acked-by: Bjorn Helgaas # for PCI parts
Acked-by: Jeff Kirsher
---
-> v2:
* Rebased.
a
> Cc: Len Brown
> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki"
> Cc: Viresh Kumar
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
> index c8
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki"
Call cpu_latency_qos_add/update/remove_request() instead of
pm_qos_add/update/remove_request(), respectively, because the
latter are going to be dropped.
No intentional functional impact.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/
On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 12:40 AM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> From: "Rafael J. Wysocki"
>
> Call cpu_latency_qos_add/update/remove_request() instead of
> pm_qos_add/update/remove_request(), respectively, because the
> latter are going to be dropped.
>
>
On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 4:58 PM James Bottomley
wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2020-11-23 at 15:19 +0100, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 11:36 PM James Bottomley
> > wrote:
[cut]
> >
> > Maintainers routinely review 1-line trivial patches, not to mention
> > internal API changes, etc.
>
>
On Monday, May 11, 2020 11:01:41 PM CEST Francisco Jerez wrote:
>
> --==-=-=
> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-="
>
> --=-=-=
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> Content-Disposition: inline
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> Peter Zijlstra writes:
>
> > On M
the device-link added by the pwm-get this
> ensures that the PWM controller will be on when the troublesome PS0
> method runs, which stops it from poking the PWM controller.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede
Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki
> ---
> drivers/acpi/acpi_lpss.c | 1 +
>
t and those do
> show that restoring the LPSS-context indeed does not seem to be necessary
> on devices using s2idle suspend (and successfully reaching S0i3). But I
> have no hardware to test deep / S3 suspend. So I'm not sure that not
> restoring the context is safe.
>
> Tha
-static DEVICE_ATTR(power_state, 0444, power_state_show, NULL);
> +static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(power_state);
>
> static ssize_t
> acpi_eject_store(struct device *d, struct device_attribute *attr,
> @@ -462,7 +462,7 @@ static ssize_t description_show(struct device *dev,
>
> return result;
> }
> -static DEVICE_ATTR(description, 0444, description_show, NULL);
> +static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(description);
>
> static ssize_t
> acpi_device_sun_show(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki
for this bit.
Thanks!
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Hi,
First off, sorry for introducing the problem and thanks for taking care
of it!
On 4/11/2017 7:09 PM, Imre Deak wrote:
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 05:54:07PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 07:12:35PM +0300, Imre Deak wrote:
+static int i915_pm_prepare(struct device *kdev)
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Several Cherry Trail devices (all of which ship with Windows 10) hide the
> LPSS PWM controller in ACPI, typically the _STA method looks like this:
>
> Method (_STA, 0, NotSerialized) // _STA: Status
> {
> If (OSID == One)
>
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 10:59 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 18-04-17 15:34, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Hans de Goede
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Several Cherry Trail devices (all of which ship with Wind
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 6:17 PM, Lukas Wunner wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:28:50PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 10:59 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> > On 18-04-17 15:34, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> >> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 1:54 P
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Several Bay / Cherry Trail devices (all of which ship with Windows 10) hide
> the LPSS PWM controller in ACPI, typically the _STA method looks like this:
>
> Method (_STA, 0, NotSerialized) // _STA: Status
> {
> If (OSID == O
On Friday, April 21, 2017 11:59:34 AM Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 19-04-17 22:14, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> >> Several Bay / Cherry Trail devices (all of which ship with Windows 10) hide
> >>
On Friday, April 21, 2017 12:42:31 PM Hans de Goede wrote:
> HI,
>
[cut]
> >>> And in that path, which I seem to have overlooked before, the
> >>> acpi_set_device_status() call is too early for invoking
> >>> acpi_device_always_present(adev), so the latter should be called
> >>> directly from ac
On Monday, April 24, 2017 10:42:42 PM Lukas Wunner wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 10:02:30PM +0200, Lukas Wunner wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 05:27:42PM +0300, Imre Deak wrote:
> > > Some drivers - like i915 - may not support the system suspend direct
> > > complete optimization due to diff
On Friday, April 21, 2017 01:43:51 PM Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 21-04-17 13:38, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Fri, 2017-04-21 at 12:47 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> >> Several Bay / Cherry Trail devices (all of which ship with Windows 10)
> >> hide
> >> the LPSS PWM controller in ACPI, typ
ver's system suspend handlers which effectively disables
> the optimization.
>
> Needed by the next patch fixing suspend/resume on i915.
>
> Suggested by Rafael.
>
> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki
> Cc: Bjorn Helgaas
> Cc: linux-...@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: sta...@vger.k
On Friday, April 28, 2017 11:33:02 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, April 28, 2017 05:16:02 PM Imre Deak wrote:
> > Some drivers - like i915 - may not support the system suspend direct
> > complete optimization due to differences in their runtime and system
> > suspend
On Sunday, April 30, 2017 03:57:13 PM Imre Deak wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 12:21:57PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Friday, April 28, 2017 11:33:02 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Friday, April 28, 2017 05:16:02 PM Imre Deak wrote:
> > > > Some
On Tuesday, May 02, 2017 12:05:38 PM Imre Deak wrote:
> On Mon, May 01, 2017 at 10:36:13PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Sunday, April 30, 2017 03:57:13 PM Imre Deak wrote:
> > > On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 12:21:57PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On F
ver's system suspend handlers which effectively disables
> the optimization.
>
> Needed by the next patch fixing suspend/resume on i915.
>
> Suggested by Rafael.
>
> v2-v3:
> - unchanged
>
> v4:
> - Move the flag to dev_flags instead of using a bit field. (R
tself cannot modify either
the pointer passed to it, or the contents of the array pointed to by
that pointer. They don't imply the location of the array itself,
though.
As for the changes:
Reviewed-by: Rafael J. Wysocki
> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman
> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki"
&
On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 4:38 PM Jani Nikula wrote:
>
> They don't need to be modified.
>
> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman
> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki"
> Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula
Reviewed-by: Rafael J. Wysocki
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_sysfs.c | 4 ++-
On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 9:36 AM Jani Nikula wrote:
>
> On Fri, 05 Oct 2018, "Rafael J. Wysocki" wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 4:38 PM Jani Nikula wrote:
> >>
> >> Let the passed in array be const (and thus placed in rodata) instead of
> >> a
On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 6:11 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> Avoids the inverted condition compared to the open coded version.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter
> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki"
> Cc: Viresh Kumar
> Cc: linux...@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: Eric Engestrom
> --
>
On 11/27/2015 12:39 PM, Jani Nikula wrote:
On Wed, 18 Nov 2015, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 03:28:38PM +0200, Imre Deak wrote:
On ke, 2015-11-18 at 12:56 +0200, Imre Deak wrote:
The runtime PM core doesn't treat EBUSY and EAGAIN retvals from the driver
suspend hooks as errors
here else (Rafael)
> v4:
> - don't refer to log levels as flags in code comment (Rafael)
> - use pr_debug(), pr_err() instead of the corresponding printk() (Rafael)
>
> Reported-by: Daniel Vetter
> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92992
> CC: Bjorn
else (Rafael)
>
> Reported-by: Daniel Vetter
> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92992
> CC: Bjorn Helgaas
> CC: Rafael J. Wysocki
> Signed-off-by: Imre Deak
> ---
> drivers/pci/pci-driver.c | 15 +--
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 2
-by: Daniel Vetter
> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92992
> CC: Bjorn Helgaas
> CC: Rafael J. Wysocki
> Signed-off-by: Imre Deak
Hi Bjorn,
Are you going to handle this one or should I take care of it?
Rafael
> ---
>
> v2:
> - fix comp
in a runtime idle state.
>
> v2:
> - Fix inconsistent return value when !CONFIG_PM.
> - Update documentation for bool return value
>
> Signed-off-by: Joonas Lahtinen
> Reported-by: Chris Wilson
> Cc: Chris Wilson
> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki"
> Cc: linux...@v
On Thursday, December 10, 2015 11:43:50 AM Imre Deak wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-12-10 at 01:58 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Wednesday, December 09, 2015 06:22:19 PM Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
> > > Introduce pm_runtime_get_noidle to for situations where it is not
> >
On Thursday, December 10, 2015 10:36:37 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thursday, December 10, 2015 11:43:50 AM Imre Deak wrote:
> > On Thu, 2015-12-10 at 01:58 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, December 09, 2015 06:22:19 PM Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
On Thursday, December 10, 2015 11:20:40 PM Imre Deak wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-12-10 at 22:42 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Thursday, December 10, 2015 10:36:37 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Thursday, December 10, 2015 11:43:50 AM Imre Deak wrote:
> > > &g
On Friday, December 11, 2015 01:03:50 PM Ulf Hansson wrote:
> [...]
>
> >> >
> >> > Which basically means you can call pm_runtime_resume() just fine,
> >> > because it will do nothing if the status is RPM_ACTIVE already.
> >> >
> >> > So really, why don't you use pm_runtime_get_sync()?
> >>
> >> T
On Friday, December 11, 2015 02:54:45 PM Imre Deak wrote:
> On to, 2015-12-10 at 23:14 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Thursday, December 10, 2015 11:20:40 PM Imre Deak wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2015-12-10 at 22:42 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Thursd
On Friday, December 11, 2015 05:47:08 PM Imre Deak wrote:
> On pe, 2015-12-11 at 16:40 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Friday, December 11, 2015 02:54:45 PM Imre Deak wrote:
> > > On to, 2015-12-10 at 23:14 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Thursday,
On Friday, December 11, 2015 04:59:45 PM Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On 11 December 2015 at 16:13, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Friday, December 11, 2015 01:03:50 PM Ulf Hansson wrote:
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > W
On Saturday, December 12, 2015 12:21:43 AM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, December 11, 2015 05:47:08 PM Imre Deak wrote:
> > On pe, 2015-12-11 at 16:40 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Friday, December 11, 2015 02:54:45 PM Imre Deak wrote:
> > > > On
On Saturday, December 12, 2015 12:41:06 AM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Saturday, December 12, 2015 12:21:43 AM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Friday, December 11, 2015 05:47:08 PM Imre Deak wrote:
> > > On pe, 2015-12-11 at 16:40 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > &g
On Saturday, December 12, 2015 07:49:56 PM Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 09:40:45PM +0200, Imre Deak wrote:
> > On Sat, 2015-12-12 at 02:51 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > +bool pm_runtime_get_if_in_use(struct device *dev)
> > > +{
> > >
From: Rafael J. Wysocki
Introduce a new runtime PM function, pm_runtime_get_if_in_use(),
that will increment the device's runtime PM usage counter and
return 'true' if its status is RPM_ACTIVE and its usage counter
is greater than 0 at the same time ('false' will be retu
On Tuesday, December 15, 2015 03:28:54 PM Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On 14 December 2015 at 23:22, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki
> >
> > Introduce a new runtime PM function, pm_runtime_get_if_in_use(),
>
> As we already have pm_runtime_set_act
On Tuesday, December 15, 2015 10:06:33 AM Alan Stern wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Dec 2015, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki
> >
> > Introduce a new runtime PM function, pm_runtime_get_if_in_use(),
> > that will increment the device's runtime PM
From: Rafael J. Wysocki
Introduce a new runtime PM function, pm_runtime_get_if_in_use(),
that will increment the device's runtime PM usage counter and
return 'true' if its status is RPM_ACTIVE and its usage counter
is greater than 0 at the same time ('false' will be retu
On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 9:18 AM, Thierry Reding
wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 05:14:09PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> On x86 we do not have devicetree to link the PWM controller and
>> the display controller together. So someone needs to call
>> pwm_add_table() to create the link, so that the
On 1/24/2017 2:33 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 3:02 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 12:40 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
Hi,
I have already reported this issue in [1].
One of the issue was solved.
Unfortunately, it looks like there is still a different problem
On 1/31/2017 11:58 AM, Imre Deak wrote:
Hi Rafael,
Hi,
On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 11:44:37PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On 1/24/2017 2:33 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 3:02 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 12:40 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
Hi,
I have
On 1/31/2017 1:02 PM, Imre Deak wrote:
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 12:39:35PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On 1/31/2017 11:58 AM, Imre Deak wrote:
Hi Rafael,
Hi,
On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 11:44:37PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On 1/24/2017 2:33 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Fri, Dec 30, 2016
On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 11:44 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki
wrote:
> On 1/24/2017 2:33 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 3:02 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 12:40 PM, Sedat Dilek
>>> wrote:
>>>&
On Thursday, February 02, 2017 02:34:42 PM Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 1:22 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 11:44 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki
> > wrote:
> >> On 1/24/2017 2:33 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On
+Mika & Andy
On Saturday, February 25, 2017 07:23:28 PM Hans de Goede wrote:
> Several cherrytrail devices (all of which ship with windows 10) hide the
> lpss pwm controller in ACPI, typically the _STA method looks like this:
>
> Method (_STA, 0, NotSerialized) // _STA: Status
> {
>
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 3:25 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 27-02-17 14:30, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>
>> +Mika & Andy
>>
>> On Saturday, February 25, 2017 07:23:28 PM Hans de Goede wrote:
>>>
>>> Several cherrytrail devices
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 15:25:32 +0100,
> Hans de Goede wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 27-02-17 14:30, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> > +Mika & Andy
>> >
>> > On Saturday, February 25, 20
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:29 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 27-02-17 22:25, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 3:25 PM, Hans de Goede
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>> On 27-02-17 14:30,
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:58 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 27-02-17 22:49, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:29 PM, Hans de Goede
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>> On 27-02-17 22:25, Ra
On Tuesday, November 10, 2015 09:20:56 AM Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On 11/06/2015 05:08 AM, ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com wrote:
> > From: Ville Syrjälä
> >
> > intel_runtime_pm_disable() takes an extra rpm reference which combined
> > with the one we leak from intel_display_set_init_power() leaves t
er data.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ankitprasad Sharma
> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki"
> Cc: Len Brown
> Cc: linux-a...@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org
> ---
> drivers/acpi/bus.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/a
On Monday, January 18, 2016 02:31:00 PM Ankitprasad Sharma wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-01-15 at 15:51 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Thursday, January 14, 2016 11:46:46 AM ankitprasad.r.sha...@intel.com
> > wrote:
> > > From: Ankitprasad Sharma
> > >
> >
On Monday, January 18, 2016 03:57:29 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, January 18, 2016 02:31:00 PM Ankitprasad Sharma wrote:
> > On Fri, 2016-01-15 at 15:51 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Thursday, January 14, 2016 11:46:46 AM ankitprasad.r.sha...@inte
On Monday, January 18, 2016 11:39:07 PM Lukas Wunner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 11:28:27PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday, January 18, 2016 03:57:29 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Monday, January 18, 2016 02:31:00 PM Ankitprasad Shar
On Tuesday, January 19, 2016 12:00:47 AM Lukas Wunner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 11:46:18PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday, January 18, 2016 11:39:07 PM Lukas Wunner wrote:
[cut]
> > > > > If you want to check if the device
On Tuesday, January 19, 2016 05:31:04 PM Lukas Wunner wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
>
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 12:59:13AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Tuesday, January 19, 2016 12:00:47 AM Lukas Wunner wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 18, 2
On Wednesday, May 31, 2017 10:41:50 PM Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> There are new types and helpers that are supposed to be used in new code.
>
> As a preparation to get rid of legacy types and API functions do
> the conversion here.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko
Acked-by:
conversion and it's safe to
> get rid of it.
Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki
with one caveat.
I have a pending patch that will use acpi_evaluate_dsm(), so I'd like this to
be made available in an immutable branch once applied.
Thanks,
Rafael
__
On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 6:20 PM, Andy Shevchenko
wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-06-05 at 18:03 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> > + in_params[0].buffer.pointer = (u8 *)&guid;
>>
>> Any idea why the pointer is defined as a u8 * in union acpi_object
>> instead of a void?
>
> I guess this question to R
workaround this and not break either SMBus or
> i915, we temporarily unmap the PCI device for the SMBus controller,
> do the thing that the firmware wanted to do, then remap the device and
> report a firmware bug.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lyude
> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki
> Cc: Be
VICE
> + depends on X86
> depends on INPUT
> select THERMAL
> + select BACKLIGHT_CLASS_DEVICE
> + select BACKLIGHT_LCD_SUPPORT
> + default y
> help
> This driver implements the ACPI Extensions For Display Adapters
> fo
1 - 100 of 241 matches
Mail list logo
