On Tue, Jan 03, 2012 at 01:47:09PM +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 03, 2012 at 09:25:30PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > In latest v6 version, I get clk transition latency from dt property, and get
> > regulator transition latency from regulator API.
> > Could you please help
On 3 January 2012 21:47, Russell King - ARM Linux
wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 03, 2012 at 09:25:30PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
>> Hi Russel,
>>
>> On 3 January 2012 17:06, Russell King - ARM Linux
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 09:44:52PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
>> >> On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at
On Tue, Jan 03, 2012 at 09:25:30PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> Hi Russel,
>
> On 3 January 2012 17:06, Russell King - ARM Linux
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 09:44:52PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> >> On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 11:10:30AM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> >> > The *call* is there i
Hi Russel,
On 3 January 2012 17:06, Russell King - ARM Linux
wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 09:44:52PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 11:10:30AM +, Mark Brown wrote:
>> > The *call* is there in the regulator subsystem, it's just that none of
>> > the drivers back it u
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 09:44:52PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 11:10:30AM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> > The *call* is there in the regulator subsystem, it's just that none of
> > the drivers back it up with an actual implementation yet. Which turns
> > out to be a good thin
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 09:51:10AM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 02:22:34PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Fix your mailer to word wrap properly please.
> If you mean last mail I sent, I didn't see anything wrong. I use
> mutt.
It's wrapping at a bit more than 80 columns a l
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 02:22:34PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 09:44:52PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 11:10:30AM +, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> Fix your mailer to word wrap properly please.
If you mean last mail I sent, I didn't see anything wrong. I
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 09:44:52PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 11:10:30AM +, Mark Brown wrote:
Fix your mailer to word wrap properly please.
> > The *call* is there in the regulator subsystem, it's just that none of
> > the drivers back it up with an actual implementa
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 11:10:30AM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 11:52:29PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 01:42:29PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 09:28:33PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
>
> > > > If you think regulator thansitio
On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 11:52:29PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 01:42:29PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 09:28:33PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > > If you think regulator thansition latency is board specific, then the
> > > board
> > > dts can overr
Hi Richard,
This is looking really nice. A couple of really minor nits inline,
otherwise:
Reviewed-by: Jamie Iles
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 03:09:10PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> The driver get cpu operation point table from device tree cpu0 node,
> and adjusts operating points using clk and r
On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 01:42:29PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 09:28:33PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 12:24:11PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > - trans-latency : transition latency of cpu freq and related regulator,
> >in unit of ns.
>
> > D
On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 09:28:33PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 12:24:11PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> - trans-latency : transition latency of cpu freq and related regulator,
>in unit of ns.
> Does it look better?
I think it shouldn't include the regulator part of th
On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 12:24:11PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 04:55:42PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 01:18:51PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > > +- trans-latency : transition_latency, in unit of ns.
>
> > > trans-latency should really say what
On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 01:10:40PM +, Jamie Iles wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> This is looking really nice. A couple of really minor nits inline,
> otherwise:
>
> Reviewed-by: Jamie Iles
Thanks.
>
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 03:09:10PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > The driver get cpu operation
On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 04:55:42PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 01:18:51PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > +- trans-latency : transition_latency, in unit of ns.
> > trans-latency should really say what latency is being measured (the CPU
> > core only or the whole operation
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 01:18:51PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 03:09:10PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > The driver get cpu operation point table from device tree cpu0 node,
> > and adjusts operating points using clk and regulator APIs.
>
> Reviewed-by: Mark Brown
>
Thanks
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 03:09:10PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> The driver get cpu operation point table from device tree cpu0 node,
> and adjusts operating points using clk and regulator APIs.
Reviewed-by: Mark Brown
but one nit:
> +Required properties in /cpus/cpu@0:
> +- cpu-freqs : cpu freq
The driver get cpu operation point table from device tree cpu0 node,
and adjusts operating points using clk and regulator APIs.
It support single core and multi-core ARM SoCs. But currently it assume
all cores share the same frequency and voltage.
Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
---
.../devicetree/
19 matches
Mail list logo
