Hi all!
The 2011.12 release marks glmark2's 10th major release!
Our OpenGL (ES) 2.0 graphics benchmark, glmark2, has been a central
component of the Linaro Graphics WG since the group's creation, and even
before that, when we still had a "User Platforms" team.
glmark2 has been improving steadily
From: Rajendra Nayak
An hwmod with a 'HWMOD_INIT_NO_IDLE' flag set, is left in
enabled state by the hwmod framework post the initial setup.
Once a real user of the device (a driver) tries to enable it
at a later point, the hwmod framework throws a WARN() about
the device being already in enabled
Am Freitag, 16. Dezember 2011, 11:30:59 schrieb Richard Zhao:
> It support single core and multi-core ARM SoCs. But it assume
> all cores share the same frequency and voltage.
>
> Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm |8 ++
> drivers/cpufreq/Makefile |1
Hi
On Mon, 21 Nov 2011, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
> An hwmod with a 'HWMOD_INIT_NO_IDLE' flag set, is left in
> enabled state by the hwmod framework post the initial setup.
> Once a real user of the device (a driver) tries to enable it
> at a later point, the hwmod framework throws a WARN() about
> t
Hi Richard,
A couple of questions inline, but otherwise looks nice!
Jamie
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 06:30:59PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> It support single core and multi-core ARM SoCs. But it assume
> all cores share the same frequency and voltage.
>
> Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
> ---
[...]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/16/2011 08:57 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 6:56 AM, Daniel Lezcano
> wrote:
>> [Me]
>>> what happens if you just reactivate CPUfreq then use menuconfig
>>> to go into drivers/ directly you will see the
>>> "Clocksource PRCM
On 12/16/2011 02:52 AM, Jamie Iles wrote:
>
>> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, l_p_j_ref);
>> +static unsigned long l_p_j_ref_freq;
>> +
>> +static struct clk *cpu_clk;
>
> This assumes that all CPU's share the same clk and run at the same rate.
> Is that a fair/safe assumption? I honestl
Greetings with a friendly reminder.
* Linaro 11.12 Release Candidate is December 19, 2011.
* Linaro 11.12 Release images is December 22, 2011
(early due to Christmas holiday).
* Linaro 11.12 release is UTC 16:00, December 22, 2011.
The release team needs:
* an up-t
Rob,
* Rob Herring [111214 05:16]:
> On 12/14/2011 05:55 AM, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
> > v3 is rebased on top of the latest serial runtime
> > patches[1] and boot tested with/without DT on OMAP4
> > SDP and OMAP4 Panda boards.
> >
> > Patches can be found here..
> > git://gitorious.org/omap-pm/lin
Tony,
On 12/16/2011 03:57 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> Rob,
>
> * Rob Herring [111214 05:16]:
>> On 12/14/2011 05:55 AM, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
>>> v3 is rebased on top of the latest serial runtime
>>> patches[1] and boot tested with/without DT on OMAP4
>>> SDP and OMAP4 Panda boards.
>>>
>>> Patch
* Rob Herring [111216 13:30]:
> Tony,
>
> On 12/16/2011 03:57 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > Rob,
> >
> > * Rob Herring [111214 05:16]:
> >> On 12/14/2011 05:55 AM, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
> >>> v3 is rebased on top of the latest serial runtime
> >>> patches[1] and boot tested with/without DT on OM
* Greg KH [111214 10:27]:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 05:18:43PM +, Alan Cox wrote:
> > On Wed, 14 Dec 2011 07:20:13 -0800
> > Kevin Hilman wrote:
> >
> > > Greg, Alan,
> > >
> > > Rajendra Nayak writes:
> > >
> > > > v3 is rebased on top of the latest serial runtime
> > > > patches[1] and
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 8:20 PM, Daniel Lezcano
wrote:
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-ux500/clock.c b/arch/arm/mach-ux500/clock.c
>> index e832664..60378b3 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-ux500/clock.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-ux500/clock.c
>> @@ -743,7 +743,8 @@ err_out:
>> late_initcall(clk_debugfs
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 5:18 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Dec 2011, Mike Turquette wrote:
>> +void __clk_unprepare(struct clk *clk)
>> +{
>> + if (!clk)
>> + return;
>> +
>> + if (WARN_ON(clk->prepare_count == 0))
>> + return;
>> +
>> + if (--clk->pre
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 9:15 PM, Ryan Mallon wrote:
> On 14/12/11 14:53, Mike Turquette wrote:
>
>> Many platforms support simple gateable clks and fixed-rate clks that
>> should not be re-implemented by every platform.
>>
>> This patch introduces a gateable clk with a common programming model of
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 11:35:39AM -0500, Mark Langsdorf wrote:
> Is there a portable/generic approach for other drivers that may
> want to use arm-cpufreq.c? arm_clk is not normally defined for
> my SoC and I don't see an easy way to pull it in.
Could you tell me the details? Is your board arch/ar
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 6:56 AM, Daniel Lezcano
wrote:
> [Me]
>> what happens if you just reactivate CPUfreq then use menuconfig
>> to go into drivers/ directly you will see the
>> "Clocksource PRCMU Timer" (sorry the clksrc subsystem does not
>> have its own submenu...), deselect that so as to us
On Thu, 2011-12-15 at 05:36 -0800, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> I'm using cyclictest to easily reproduce the problem on my dual cortex-A9
So does the cyclictest itself exhibit the problem or running cyclictest
with another workload showed the problem? In other words, what numbers
of the workload did y
On 16 December 2011 01:58, Suresh Siddha wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-12-15 at 05:36 -0800, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>> I'm using cyclictest to easily reproduce the problem on my dual cortex-A9
>
> So does the cyclictest itself exhibit the problem or running cyclictest
> with another workload showed the pr
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:50:07PM -0600, Mark Langsdorf wrote:
> I'd prefer to see clk_get90 replaced with of_clk_get() and
> get_this_cpu_node() from the clk-cpufreq driver by Jamie Iles that
> I resubmitted yesterday.
Why isn't of_clk_get() hidden inside clk_get() ?
___
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 08:24:23AM +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:50:07PM -0600, Mark Langsdorf wrote:
> > I'd prefer to see clk_get90 replaced with of_clk_get() and
> > get_this_cpu_node() from the clk-cpufreq driver by Jamie Iles that
> > I resubmitted yesterd
The driver support single core and multi core ARM SoCs. For multi core,
it assume all cores share the same clock and voltage.
Changes in v2:
- add volatage change support
- change '_' in property name to '-'
- use initial value to calculate loops_per_jiffy
- fix reading cpu_volts property bug
Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
---
arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig |1 +
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig
index c44aa97..39cf00a 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig
@@ -595,6 +595,7 @
cpufreq needs cpu clock to change frequency.
Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
---
arch/arm/mach-imx/clock-imx6q.c |1 +
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-imx/clock-imx6q.c b/arch/arm/mach-imx/clock-imx6q.c
index 039a7ab..72acbc2 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mac
It support single core and multi-core ARM SoCs. But it assume
all cores share the same frequency and voltage.
Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
---
drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm |8 ++
drivers/cpufreq/Makefile |1 +
drivers/cpufreq/arm-cpufreq.c | 269
Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
---
arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi |3 +++
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi
index 263e8f3..f2e3eaf 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi
@
Great! Thanks David. I've linked to it and Vincent's page from here:
https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/PowerManagement/Doc/BoardHackingforPower
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 2:39 AM, David Anders wrote:
> Amit,
>
> i've started a wiki page with some of the basic information:
>
> http://elinux.org/
Hi Paul,
On Friday 16 December 2011 04:07 PM, Paul Walmsley wrote:
On Mon, 21 Nov 2011, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
> An hwmod with a 'HWMOD_INIT_NO_IDLE' flag set, is left in
> enabled state by the hwmod framework post the initial setup.
> Once a real user of the device (a driver) tries to enabl
Status report:
https://wiki.linaro.org/OfficeofCTO/WeeklyReport
Last weekly meeting minutes:
https://wiki.linaro.org/OfficeofCTO/2011-12-13
Highlights:
= ARMHF =
- Debian: 67 % of the archive built
(https://buildd.debian.org/stats/graph-week-big.png), chasing/fixing up
~140-180 build failures now
On 12/16/2011 04:30 AM, Richard Zhao wrote:
> It support single core and multi-core ARM SoCs. But it assume
> all cores share the same frequency and voltage.
>
> Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm |8 ++
> drivers/cpufreq/Makefile |1 +
> drivers/cpufr
Hi Rajendra,
Just one minor comment if you plan to repost.
On 12/14/2011 12:55 PM, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
Pass minimal data needed for console boot, from dt, for
OMAP4 panda/sdp and OMAP3 beagle boards, and get rid of the
static initialization from generic board file.
Acked-by: Rob Herring
Sign
Enclosed please find the link to the Weekly Status report & meeting
minutes
for the Power Management working group for the week ending 2011-12-16
== Weekly Status Report ==
https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/PowerManagement/Status/2011-12-15
== Meeting Minutes ==
https://wiki.linaro.org/Wor
Is there a portable/generic approach for other drivers that may
want to use arm-cpufreq.c? arm_clk is not normally defined for
my SoC and I don't see an easy way to pull it in.
--Mark Langsdorf
Calxeda, Inc.
From: Richard Zhao [richard.z...@linaro.org]
Sen
* Paul Walmsley [111216 04:18]:
>
> From: Rajendra Nayak
>
> An hwmod with a 'HWMOD_INIT_NO_IDLE' flag set, is left in
> enabled state by the hwmod framework post the initial setup.
> Once a real user of the device (a driver) tries to enable it
> at a later point, the hwmod framework throws a W
34 matches
Mail list logo
