Sangwook Lee wrote:
>
> sdhci-s3c updates pm_caps from platform data for SDIO PM.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sangwook Lee
Acked-by: Kukjin Kim
Hi Chris,
Could you please pick this up in your tree for v3.3?
Thanks.
Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim , Senior Engineer,
SW Solution Development Team,
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Paul Walmsley wrote:
> This implementation of clk_get_rate() is racy, and is, in general, unsafe.
> The problem is that, in many cases, the clock's rate may change between
> the time that clk_get_rate() is called and the time that the returned
> rate is used. This
The framebuffer driver needs the clock named 'lcd' as its bus
clock but the equivalent clock on Exynos4 is named as 'fimd'.
Hence, create a clkdev lookup entry with the name 'lcd' that
references the 'fimd' clock.
Signed-off-by: Tushar Behera
---
arch/arm/mach-exynos/clock.c | 14 +
Following patchset is required to add framebuffer support on Origen.
The patches are based on following commit on Kukjin's for-next branch.
a188e1e "Merge branch 'next-samsung-devel' into for-next"
Tushar Behera (3):
ARM: EXYNOS: Increase DMA pool allocator size for framebuffer
- Requi
Some of the boards under mach-exynos initialize frame-buffers
for which the memory requirement is more than 2MB, hence the
default dma pool allocation size of 2MB is not sufficient.
The consistent dma size is hence increased to successfully
allocate memory for those boards.
Signed-off-by: Tushar
Framebuffer driver needs to fetch the video data during the rising
edge of the VCLK. Otherwise, there are some glitches in the LCD
display.
Signed-off-by: Tushar Behera
---
arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-origen.c |3 ++-
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach
Hello.
Here is the weekly status report from the Android Platform Team.
Key Points for wider discussion
===
* Android 4.0 ICS boots with gcc 4.6. Still some workarounds required.
* Android 4.0 ICS up and running on iMX53.
* 11.12 Pre-release 1 (ICS) has been validat
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/30/2011 08:56 PM, Zach Pfeffer wrote:
> On 30 November 2011 11:41, Amit Kucheria wrote:
>> Wow - quite a cc-list :)
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 7:47 PM, Zach Pfeffer
>> wrote:
>>> Amit/Mounir,
>>>
>>> What's your guys plan with cpu_idle for
On 30 November 2011 11:41, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> Wow - quite a cc-list :)
>
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 7:47 PM, Zach Pfeffer wrote:
>> Amit/Mounir,
>>
>> What's your guys plan with cpu_idle for each board? Are you going to
>> try and upstream a solution that will work across all boards? Would
>>
Wow - quite a cc-list :)
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 7:47 PM, Zach Pfeffer wrote:
> Amit/Mounir,
>
> What's your guys plan with cpu_idle for each board? Are you going to
> try and upstream a solution that will work across all boards? Would
> you or Mounir be open to filing a BP per board so we can tr
Greetings,
Here is the summary for Linaro release 11.11 postmortem and lessons learned.
For a detailed release review please visit
https://wiki.linaro.org/Cycles//Release/Review
Highlights and Key Successes
This month's release was highlighted by the release
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > In principal we could also offer the user options as to which particular
> > platform a guest looks like.
>
> At least when using a qemu based simulation. Most platforms have some
> characteristics that are not meaningful in a classic virtualization
>
On Wednesday 30 November 2011, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 14:32 +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Wednesday 30 November 2011, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > What I suggested to the KVM developers is to start out with the
> > vexpress platform, but then generalize it to the point where it
All,
We just deleted the #linaro-mentors channel a few minutes ago. This
channel was not getting much traffic and we felt that there are better
ways to get help including:
* asking on #linaro
* asking on this mailing list
* using ask.linaro.org
-andy
_
On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 14:32 +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 30 November 2011, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 13:03 +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > For domU the DT would presumably be constructed by the toolstack (in
> > dom0 userspace) as appropriate for the guest configur
On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 13:03 +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 30 November 2011, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Tue, 29 Nov 2011, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 29 November 2011, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > >
> > > Do you have a pointer to the kernel sources for the Linux guest?
On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 14:32 +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> I don't care much either way, but I think it would be good to
> use similar solutions across all hypervisors. The two options
> that I've seen discussed for KVM were to use either a virtual PCI
> bus with individual virtio-pci devices as on
On Wednesday 30 November 2011, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 13:03 +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Wednesday 30 November 2011, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > This is the same choice people have made for KVM, but it's not
> > necessarily the best option in the long run. In particular
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On 30 November 2011 11:39, Stefano Stabellini
> wrote:
> > A git branch is available here (not ready for submission):
> >
> > git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git arm
> >
> > the branch above is based on git://linux-arm.org/linux-2.
On 30 November 2011 11:39, Stefano Stabellini
wrote:
> A git branch is available here (not ready for submission):
>
> git://xenbits.xen.org/people/sstabellini/linux-pvhvm.git arm
>
> the branch above is based on git://linux-arm.org/linux-2.6.git arm-lpae,
> even though guests don't really need lpa
On Wednesday 30 November 2011, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Nov 2011, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Tuesday 29 November 2011, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> >
> > Do you have a pointer to the kernel sources for the Linux guest?
>
> We have very few changes to the Linux kernel at the moment (
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011, Anup Patel wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I wanted to know how Xen-ARM for A15 will address following concerns:
>
> - How will Xen-ARM for A15 support legacy guest environment like ARMv5 or
> ARMv6 ?
It is not our focus at the moment; we are targeting operating systems
that support a
On Tue, 29 Nov 2011, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 29 November 2011, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > a few weeks ago I (and a few others) started hacking on a
> > proof-of-concept hypervisor port to Cortex-A15 which uses and requires
> > ARMv7 virtualization extensions. The intention
Hi all,
I wanted to know how Xen-ARM for A15 will address following concerns:
- How will Xen-ARM for A15 support legacy guest environment like ARMv5 or
ARMv6 ?
- What if my Cortex-A15 board does not have a GIC with virtualization
support ?
Best Regards,
Anup Patel
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 2:59 A
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Haojian Zhuang
wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 1:00 PM, MyungJoo Ham
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Haojian Zhuang
>> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 6:13 PM, Donggeun Kim wrote:
Because battery health monitoring should be done even when
25 matches
Mail list logo
