On Tue, 11 Jun 2013, Pawel Moll wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-06-11 at 06:33 +0100, Sanjay Singh Rawat wrote:
> > >> use cpu_do_idle for entering the wfi mode.
> > >>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Sanjay Singh Rawat
> > >> ---
> > >> arch/arm/mach-vexpress/hotplug.c |3 ++-
> > >> 1 file changed, 2 insert
On Thu, 30 May 2013, Dave Martin wrote:
> So, the problem is the hacked DT bindings we're using for vexpress,
> which aren't compatible with upstream -- the perf changes assume
> these non-standard bindings are in use.
>
> Your fix won't work for platforms which describe multiple CPU PMUs in
> th
On Thu, 16 May 2013, Liviu Dudau wrote:
> From previous discussions between Achin, Charles and Nico I am aware
> that Nico has decided for the moment that target residency should be
> useful enough to be used by MCPM. That is because Nico is a big
> proponent of doing everything in the kernel a
On Wed, 15 May 2013, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 15 May 2013 14:38, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > I see that the ARM version is following the pattern of SPARC64 and X86
> > SSSE3 in how it is configured, so for fear of opening a can of worms,
> > perhaps it's simpler if we just go with the linaro
I'm delighted to announce that the Linaro Technical Steering Committee
has approved the release of the big.LITTLE in-kernel switcher (IKS) code
to the public.
So here it is:
Branch big.LITTLE-IKS-snapshot of
git://git.linaro.org/landing-teams/working/arm/kernel.git
Although this is a snapshot
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 06:47:53PM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-03-12 at 21:40 +0800, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 05:37:41AM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
> > > > Add the below four notifier events so
On Wed, 20 Feb 2013, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> After some time investigating why I wasn't seeing some kernel section
> mismatch errors that someone else was seeing, I found the cause was that
> in Linaro we build Thumb2 kernels in the main, and modpost.c doesn't
> have support for any of the Th
On Mon, 18 Feb 2013, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> Since Peter and I were discussing this on IRC that led to this email,
> here is a bit of context on the current behaviour:
>
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Peter Maydell
> wrote:
> > Hi; does anybody else think it would be a good idea to move all
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013, Zach Pfeffer wrote:
> We've been discussing this in other contexts and I think it would be good
> to have a unified plan across Linaro that involves early and often
> engagement with Google. At this point, as far as I'm aware, Google hasn't
> picked up the big.LITTLE baton in
On Wed, 16 Jan 2013, Mark Hambleton wrote:
> > > > > +obj-$(CONFIG_BIG_LITTLE) += arm_big_little.o
> > > > There is nothing big.LITTLE specific in all of this, so arm_idle.c would
> > > >be better.
> > >
> > > I figured that because the current version calls into the big.little
> > > platform po
On Tue, 15 Jan 2013, Mark Hambleton wrote:
> Hi Lorenzo,
>
> > > +obj-$(CONFIG_BIG_LITTLE) += arm_big_little.o
> > There is nothing big.LITTLE specific in all of this, so arm_idle.c would
> >be better.
>
> I figured that because the current version calls into the big.little
> platform power fr
On Tue, 18 Dec 2012, Todd Poynor wrote:
> I put this up on AOSP Gerrit at
> https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/48233/ with a minor change
> to the semaphore field name to be more descriptive and to identify it
> as a semaphore.
>
> After some out-of-band discussion it was agreed the race
On Fri, 14 Dec 2012, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 14/12/12 15:54, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > I must admit, my patch is based on someone elses work, and I've not seen
> > documentation which says that NOR flash can be written to simply by the
> > application being loaded by the models having code l
On Wed, 24 Oct 2012, Pawel Moll wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-10-23 at 22:56 -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > The script to generate a boot script to generate an ATAGS block is a
> > rather nice hack.
>
> These days are, fortunately, long gone :-)
I deduced as much, given
On Wed, 24 Oct 2012, Ryan Harkin wrote:
> On 24 October 2012 09:29, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
>
> > Personally (and unofficially), I find that the simplest and most
> > reliable way to use vexpress is to flash the kernel/dtb/initrd images
> > into NOR flash and use the bootmonitor supplied with
On Wed, 24 Oct 2012, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> The official release pages will include _some_ similar (and more up to
> date information), however you won't find any mention of any bootloader
> other than UEFI.
Another bootloader to hate. Joy!
> And, at least for now, no mention of how to bo
On Wed, 24 Oct 2012, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Nice article!
Thanks.
> On 24 October 2012 08:26, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> >
> > When working on low level kernel code, the indication that something
> > went wrong is often noticed as a kernel oops, or even a totally silent
&
When working on low level kernel code, the indication that something
went wrong is often noticed as a kernel oops, or even a totally silent
system. This usually implies a modify-recompile-reboot cycle which can
become very very annoying if the reboot step implies popping out an SD
card from t
On Wed, 13 Jun 2012, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-06-12 at 14:02 +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_OF
>
> That must really be the worst CONFIG_ name ever..
Indeed! We must corner Grant to do a s/CONFIG_OF/CONFIG_DEVICE_TREE/
on the whole tree and send the patch to Linus.
On Fri, 6 Apr 2012, Ricardo Salveti wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 6:05 AM, Wookey wrote:
> > The fundamental question really is 'are we a distro or not'? If linaro
> > is not a distro then no-one should be expecting stable releases - we
> > are a technology showcase, and developer quick-start m
On Wed, 21 Mar 2012, Paul Walmsley wrote:
> Hello Nico,
>
> On Tue, 20 Mar 2012, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
>
> > This common clk API has been under development for over *two* years
> > already, with several attempts to merge it. And each previous merge
> > attemp
On Tue, 20 Mar 2012, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Looks like you never heard from anyone actively working on at91,
> shmobile, kirwood or davinci.
>
> I'm not sure we should merge those platform-specific changes without an
> ack from those platform maintainers.
Depends. There is a limit to how long yo
On Wed, 21 Mar 2012, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 12:48 AM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> > Maybe it's time that drivers/cpuidle gets a maintainer. With lots of
> > discussions of scheduler changes that affect load estimation, I suspect
> > we're all going to have a bit of CPUidle work
On Tue, 20 Mar 2012, Paul Walmsley wrote:
> We need to indicate in some way that the existing code and API is very
> likely to change in ways that could involve quite a bit of work for
> adopters.
[...]
> Anyway. It is okay if we want to have some starter common clock framework
> in mainline
On Fri, 16 Mar 2012, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> FWIW, it's in arm-soc now, and it's the last thing I put in there
> for v3.4.
Amen!
Nicolas
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012, jonsm...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Nicolas Pitre
> wrote:
> > On Mon, 12 Mar 2012, jonsm...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> >> I'm working on getting out of tree support for the NXP LPC31xx
> >> ARM926EJS based
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012, jonsm...@gmail.com wrote:
> I'm working on getting out of tree support for the NXP LPC31xx
> ARM926EJS based CPUs ready for submission. Everything was working fine
> on v3.2 but I lost the ability to boot with v3.3. The boot failure is
> very early in the boot process. I did a
On Fri, 9 Mar 2012, Dave Martin wrote:
> Register variables feel like a red herring though. We're only using
> those because we can't do the needful thing and actually desscribe
> these constraints in the asm constraints (which would seem to be the
> right place). We specifically don't care wher
On Thu, 8 Mar 2012, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> On 02/03/12 21:15, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > So, to me, the gcc documentation is perfectly clear on this topic.
> > there really _is_ a guarantee that those asm marked variables will be in
> > the expected registers on entry to
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 12:58 +, Dave Martin wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 09:56:02AM +, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 09:34 +, Dave Martin wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 12:28:29PM +, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
[ coming back from vacation and trying to catch up ]
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, Dave Martin wrote:
> Just had a chat with some tools guys -- apparently, when passing register
> arguments to gcc inline asms there really isn't a guarantee that those
> variables will be in the expected registers on entry
For those of you interested by the topic, my article was published
today. With a LWN subscription (or freely accessible in 2 weeks), it
can be viewed here:
http://lwn.net/Articles/481055/
The comments section is growing fast already!
Nicolas
___
l
On Tue, 31 Jan 2012, Zach Pfeffer wrote:
> On 31 January 2012 15:01, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > You just can't have it both ways. If you focus on a stable platform
> > then you cannot have the latest features. If you develop new features,
> > it obviously can't
On Tue, 31 Jan 2012, Zach Pfeffer wrote:
> On 31 January 2012 11:19, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > On Tue, 31 Jan 2012, Zach Pfeffer wrote:
> >
> >> They love our builds, but they'd really like it if they could get
> >> stock AOSP builds for their boards on stabl
On Tue, 31 Jan 2012, Zach Pfeffer wrote:
> They love our builds, but they'd really like it if they could get
> stock AOSP builds for their boards on stable kernels that they can
> work with using fastboot that have been CI tested and QA'd.
>
> I'm not advocating for the wholesale destruction of o
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Dec 2011, Will Deacon wrote:
>
> > Rather than me point each landing team at the patches, would you be able
> > to cherry-pick the fixes from mainline please? They are:
> >
> > bce34d14 ("ARM: perf: initi
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi Nicolas,
>
> It seems as though some of my perf patches have ended up in the Linaro
> kernel source but the fixes that I've pushed during the -rc haven't made
> it:
>
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/linaro-landing-team-freescale/+bug/893653
>
> https://
On Wed, 14 Dec 2011, Amit Kachhap wrote:
> Hi Nicolas,
>
> Please pull my samsung thermal implementation work from git repository
> (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git thermal_cpu_cooling).
> Some of the patches are under review and some are in mainline in 3.2 rc*
> version.
> It i
On Wed, 14 Dec 2011, Amit Kachhap wrote:
> Hi Nicolas,
>
> Is it possible for you to add these 2 patches for this month release? I am
> not able to give you the git link as there is seems some problem with the
> linaro git server.
> Also I attached the patches in case required.
I merged them. H
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011, John Rigby wrote:
> With the latest 3.1.5 merge linux-linaro-3.1 fails to build on Jenkins:
>
> https://ci.linaro.org/jenkins/view/All%20CI/job/linux-linaro-3.1_panda-omap2plus/303/
>
> GEN .version
> CHK include/generated/compile.h
> UPD include/generated/
On Mon, 12 Dec 2011, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> Does anyone have some clues or ideas I can investigate ?
> I am really not familiar with this part.
See the next suggestion I gave you in my previous email.
You could also work with Linus Walleij who maintains this architecture,
and who has access to
g --- See above for more info
> %%
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 12/02/2011 01:11 AM, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > Yes. Either you have access to a fancy debugger and then
On Fri, 2 Dec 2011, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> On 12/01/2011 08:03 PM, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > Please have a look at this email:
> >
> > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/141386
> >
> > There are two patches in there which should help you
On Thu, 1 Dec 2011, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> On 12/01/2011 03:58 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 03:51:00PM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> >
> >> commit 549158d2ab01e8370d2773044fe09738a26f7086
> >> Author: Nicolas Pitre
> >&
On Mon, 14 Nov 2011, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> Hi Nicolas,
>
> Could you pull the sched_mc code from
>
> git://git.linaro.org/people/vingu/kernel.git on the branch sched_mc_for_11.11
>
> This branch is rebased on your tree and contains sched_mc optimization
> code as well as some patches, which
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011, Amit Kachhap wrote:
> Hi Nicolas,
>
> Please pull the samsung cpuidle code from,
>
> (git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git branch:
> samsung_cpuidle_l2_retention).
Merged, thanks.
Nicolas
___
linaro-dev mailing li
On Tue, 8 Nov 2011, Deepak Saxena wrote:
> On 8 November 2011 14:10, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > On Tue, 8 Nov 2011, Deepak Saxena wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Michael,
> >>
> >> I went to take a look at the kernel ci-loop page to see the build
> >> statu
On Tue, 8 Nov 2011, Deepak Saxena wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> I went to take a look at the kernel ci-loop page to see the build
> status of upstream builds ...
FYI, the venerable ARM kautobuild run by Vincent Sanders was shut down a
while ago.
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel
We are considering freezing the 11.11 kernel this next Monday (Nov 14)
in order to release it on Wednesday (Nov 16), so it is out there before
the US Thanksgiving holiday.
If anyone would like to see their patches included in the Linaro kernel
for this month, please consider submitting them AS
On Thu, 20 Oct 2011, John Rigby wrote:
> This tree seems to be missing per board dt support so booting with a
> device tree doesn't seem to work. Need something like for example
> this commit that added it for panda in the 3.0 tree:
>
> commit d24e9a194c2ed4ca56b8f4e7d96038cd3af3fda8
> Author: G
On Thu, 20 Oct 2011, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Oct 2011, john stultz wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2011-10-20 at 03:11 -0700, Deepak Saxena wrote:
> > > The Linaro Kernel Working Group (KWG) is excited to announce the
> > > availability our October 2011 developmen
linux-linaro-3.1.git
> > tag: linux-linaro-3.1-2011.10-1
> >
> > In addition to an update to the 3.1 (-rc10) kernel, this kernel includes
> > the following changes that are queued up for 3.2:
> >
> ...
> > - boot_params to atag_offset transition froma Nic
On Thu, 20 Oct 2011, Amit Kachhap wrote:
> Hi Nicolas,
>
> This is a request to pull L2 retention cpuidle implementation from
> git://git.linaro.org/people/amitdanielk/linux.git (branch-
> samsung_cpuidle_l2_retention)
>
> The top 5 patches on this refers to the work and this is heavily based
>
On Wed, 19 Oct 2011, Rob Lee wrote:
> (Re-send from my Linaro email address this time)
>
> Requesting to add the commits in the attached patch to the October
> Linaro release. These commits add a common imx cpuidle driver, some
> common cpuidle mach-mx5 code, and the init call for i.MX51 SoCs.
>
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> Hi Nicolas,
>
> On 17 October 2011 15:33, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > On Mon, 17 Oct 2011, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 3:43 AM, John Stultz
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hey Amit,
&
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> Do we know yet which kernel version we are targeting for the Linaro
> 11.10 release?
According to the latest weather forecast, this should be a 3.1 based
kernel.
Nicolas
___
linaro-dev mailing list
l
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 3:43 AM, John Stultz wrote:
> > Hey Amit,
> > In updating our tree to 3.1, I noticed the SCHED_MC config option
> > dropped out of the savedefconfig and it doesn't seem to be found in the
> > arm Kconfig.
> >
> > Is that e
On Wed, 5 Oct 2011, Andy Green wrote:
> Actually, it would be a big advantage for many folks to not be doing their
> Android kernel development on lagging releases, but by tracking Linus HEAD.
> They would have access to latest stuff already and they don't have to think
> about backport or later f
On Mon, 19 Sep 2011, Rob Clark wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 10:39 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> > Arnd,
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 08:15:45AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >> Assuming that we can prevent any funny stuff from going into such an ABI,
> >> we only need to worry about the warts o
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011, John Stultz wrote:
> So being on vacation for a few days and checking my mail and have found
> an explosion of emails. Unfortunately most of them are duplicates.
>
> It seems the linaro-dev list isn't configed to avoid mailing folks who
> are already recipients of the email.
On Wed, 24 Aug 2011, Venkatraman S wrote:
> On 23 August 2011 23:56, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > On Tue, 23 Aug 2011, Venkatraman S wrote:
> >
> >> From: Venkatraman S
> >>
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Venkatraman S
> >> ---
> &g
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011, Venkatraman S wrote:
> From: Venkatraman S
>
> If SPARSE_IRQ is defined, NR_IRQS will not necessarily be
> relevant. Use the number populated in machine descriptor.
>
> Note: HARDIRQ_BITS is defined as a constant independent of NR_IRQS.
> Needs review if this assumption mak
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011, Venkatraman S wrote:
> From: Venkatraman S
>
> The underlying implementation in enable_fiq/disable_fiq uses
> the irqs anyway, so use them directly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Venkatraman S
Maybe folding the FIQ_START constant into the actual fiq number would be
better here. Lo
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011, Venkatraman S wrote:
> From: Venkatraman S
>
> The underlying implementation in enable_fiq/disable_fiq uses
> the irqs anyway, so use them directly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Venkatraman S
Same comment as for patch #22/24.
> ---
> sound/soc/imx/imx-pcm-fiq.c |4 ++--
> 1
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011, Venkatraman S wrote:
> From: Venkatraman S
>
> fiq interface as used by mx1 camera is suspicious, with the
> definition of NR_IRQS to be 1024 in the only platform this is used
> (OMAP). Set the stage for decoupling this from using the fiq interface.
>
> Signed-off-by: Venka
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011, Venkatraman S wrote:
> From: Venkatraman S
>
> Currently a hack. Need to define a polite way of defining
> IRQ_BITMAP_BITS
>
> Signed-off-by: Venkatraman S
Well... given how IRQ_BITMAP_BITS is used, it looks like simply having a
sufficiently high number is all that is ne
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011, Venkatraman S wrote:
> From: Venkatraman S
>
>
> Signed-off-by: Venkatraman S
Same issue here, however it is not obvious what provides
that the code relies on. In such cases it is a good idea to state it in
the commit log so if the solution is not satisfactory then it
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011, Venkatraman S wrote:
> From: Venkatraman S
>
>
> Signed-off-by: Venkatraman S
> ---
> drivers/gpio/gpio-exynos4.c |2 +-
> drivers/gpio/gpio-nomadik.c |2 +-
> drivers/gpio/gpio-s5pv210.c |1 +
> drivers/gpio/pl061.c|1 +
Same issue as for patch #1
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011, Venkatraman S wrote:
> From: Venkatraman S
>
> Do not depend on the generic irq header file to include the platform
> specific header file.
>
> Signed-off-by: Venkatraman S
This is wrong.
Obviously we don't want the generic to include
anymore, however we also want to
On Mon, 22 Aug 2011, Christian Robottom Reis wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 09:54:56PM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > > AS arch/arm/boot/compressed/head.o
> > > arch/arm/boot/compressed/head.S: Assembler messages:
> > > arch/arm/boot/compressed/head.S:127:
On Mon, 22 Aug 2011, Tushar Behera wrote:
> Hi Nicolas,
>
> Can you please cherry-pick following patch onto linaro kernel?
>
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/kgene/linux-samsung.git;a=patch;h=d2edddf2b25863ec0893635662b0832f9965b543
Done.
On Sun, 21 Aug 2011, John Rigby wrote:
> I'm having trouble building the Thumb2 kernel on, I actually believe
> this same code worked some time ago before a toolchain update. There
> are actually two problems described below. I get past the first with
> a config change but don't know how to fix
On Thu, 18 Aug 2011, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 6:24 PM, Nicolas Pitre
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 17 Aug 2011, Dave Martin wrote:
> >
> >> Acked-by = This patch is definitely right, or I fully agree with the
> >> patch and trust t
On Wed, 17 Aug 2011, Dave Martin wrote:
> Acked-by = This patch is definitely right, or I fully agree with the
> patch and trust the author's judgement ("I will share
> responsibility for the correctness and appropriateness of this
> patch"). This implies Reviewed-by.
> No
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011, Rob Herring wrote:
> On 07/29/2011 07:40 AM, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > On Fri, 29 Jul 2011, Dave Martin wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 02:44:17PM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 28 Jul 2011, Dave Martin wrote:
> >
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 02:44:17PM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > On Thu, 28 Jul 2011, Dave Martin wrote:
>
> > > I have a slightly biased interest in this, since ARM seems to like
> > > funky memory maps for many of its
On Thu, 28 Jul 2011, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 10:58:36PM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> >
> > To everyone, and especially to those who are expected to work on this
> > topic next week, please find below a list of tasks that needs to be
> > inves
On Thu, 28 Jul 2011, James Westby wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 18:18:09 +0200, Daniel Lezcano
> wrote:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > On 07/28/2011 12:58 PM, James Westby wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Have you tried the omap3 hardware pack with a Linaro image? Tha
To everyone, and especially to those who are expected to work on this
topic next week, please find below a list of tasks that needs to be
investigated and/or accomplished. I'll coordinate the work and collect
patches for the team.
If you have comments on this, or if you know about some omissi
gt;> > > On Mon, 2011-07-18 at 22:57 -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> >> > >> Please let me know if you want to see something merged into the
> >> > >> linaro-3.0 tree before Thursday.
> >> > >
> >> > > So I'm working on mer
On Thu, 21 Jul 2011, Grant Likely wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Nicolas Pitre
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 21 Jul 2011, Grant Likely wrote:
> >
> >> You can pull devicetree/next right now. I've still got a few things
> >> to do before I get you to
On Thu, 21 Jul 2011, Grant Likely wrote:
> You can pull devicetree/next right now. I've still got a few things
> to do before I get you to pull the dt board support patches. Give me
> a few more hours.
No problem. I can wait until I go to bed.
Nicolas
___
On Tue, 19 Jul 2011, Grant Likely wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 03:22:58PM -0300, Ricardo Salveti wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 3:04 PM, Nicolas Pitre
> > wrote:
> > > On Tue, 19 Jul 2011, John Rigby wrote:
> > >
> > >> My first request
On Tue, 19 Jul 2011, John Rigby wrote:
> My first request would be for board level device tree support.
I think Grant should have that ready soon.
Nicolas
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinf
Yes, it is the big 3.0 coming to a Linaro server near you !
The Linux v3.0 based Linaro kernel branch is now available from:
http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=kernel/linux-linaro-3.0.git;a=summary
http://git.linaro.org/git/kernel/linux-linaro-3.0.git
Since the official final v3.0 from Linus To
On Tue, 12 Jul 2011, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> From: Vincent Guittot
>
> (Patch accepted by Russell for 3.1:
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg131273.html)
That is good enough for me. I merged it in the linaro-2.6.39 tree for
now, and I'll pick it up from mainline when linaro-3.0 open
On Fri, 8 Jul 2011, Richard Henderson wrote:
> I find this attitude to be short-sighted. These exact same arguments
> were made about a.out vs elf, and all the horrible extra overhead
> that elf has with its plts and dynamic symbol resolution.
The fact that people came up with hacks such as prel
On Fri, 8 Jul 2011, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 07/08/2011 01:23 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> > There is a slight performance hit to using a VDSO in that each entry
> > will need to go through the PLT rather than jumping directly to the
> > helper function in the kernel.
>
> Yes. But IMO the
On Fri, 8 Jul 2011, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 08, 2011 at 12:21:27AM +0100, David Gilbert wrote:
> > Nicolas just added; Richard's argument is that if it was actually a
> > VDSO I'd just have linked against a symbol and if the symbol wasn't
> > there then I would have got a fairly normal li
On Sun, 3 Jul 2011, Per Forlin wrote:
> On 2 July 2011 21:37, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Saturday 02 July 2011 14:29:38 Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> >> One other thing to be considered here is whether this idea should be
> >> limited to just MMC or whether it should be extended further, to
On Thu, 23 Jun 2011, Andy Green wrote:
> Hi -
>
> I mentioned this already to npitre but for various reasons we are planning to
> target 3.0 kernel rather than linux-linaro-2.6.39 at the moment. 2.6.39 has
> some known issues like no onboard audio or HDMI audio, but since 3.0 has a new
> and bet
On Thu, 23 Jun 2011, John Rigby wrote:
> I thought this was new but it has been around for awhile. My default
> config was not turning on THUMB2 kernel so I only saw it today.
Old known issue. I wonder why I didn't stumble on it. Should be fixed
now.
Nicolas
___
On Wed, 22 Jun 2011, Vishwanath Sripathy wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Amit Kucheria
> wrote:
> > On 11 Jun 22, Vishwanath Sripathy wrote:
> >> Hi Nicolas,
> >>
> >> Can you pls pull below patch from 2.6.39 mainline kernel into 11.5
> >> Linaro kernel? This would fix some of the DVFS
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011, Per Forlin wrote:
> On 21 June 2011 21:18, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > On Tue, 21 Jun 2011, Per Forlin wrote:
> >
> >> On 21 June 2011 07:41, Kishore Kadiyala
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:52:12PM +0530, Amit Mahajan wrote:
> > ERROR: "__aeabi_uldivmod" [sound/soc/codecs/snd-soc-wm8974.ko]
> > undefined!
> > ERROR: "__aeabi_uldivmod" [sound/soc/codecs/snd-soc-wm8940.ko]
> > undefined!
> > ERROR: "__aeabi_uldivmod"
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011, Per Forlin wrote:
> On 21 June 2011 07:41, Kishore Kadiyala wrote:
> >
> >
> >> +
> >> +static void omap_hsmmc_pre_req(struct mmc_host *mmc, struct mmc_request
> >> *mrq,
> >> + bool is_first_req)
> >
> > I don't see the usage of "is_first_req"
On Mon, 20 Jun 2011, John Rigby wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 5:41 AM, Nicolas Pitre
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 8 Jun 2011, John Rigby wrote:
> >
> >> Nicolas,
> >>
> >> Is device tree stuff equivalent to what was in .38 going in? I'm
> >>
On Mon, 20 Jun 2011, Shawn Guo wrote:
> Due to the issue reported with ESDHC_CD_CONTROLLER mode as below,
> GPIO mode becomes the best choice for card detection before the
> issue gets addressed.
>
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/120790
>
> Signed-off-by: Shawn Guo
Than
On Fri, 17 Jun 2011, Shawn Guo wrote:
> Hi Nicolas,
>
> Could you pull the fix for [Bug 754254] imx51 randomly truncates
> serial input at 31 characters?
>
> It extends the card CD/WP support for mx5 platforms, and adds the
> board level configuration for mx51evk to fix bug 754254 on this
> part
On Sat, 18 Jun 2011, Arnaud Patard wrote:
> Dave Martin writes:
> Hi,
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I've recently become aware that a few packages are causing alignment
> > faults on ARM, and are relying on the alignment fixup emulation code in
> > the kernel in order to work.
> >
> > Such faults are ve
1 - 100 of 281 matches
Mail list logo
