our board arch/arm/mach-highbank/ Rob
maintained?
clk API is the most generic way for arm as far as I find out.
Thanks
Richard
>
> --Mark Langsdorf
> Calxeda, Inc.
>
> ____
> From: Richard Zhao [richard.z...@linaro.org]
> Sent: Friday, Decemb
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 12:26:03PM +0100, Heiko Stübner wrote:
> 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.
> >
> >
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 08:32:35AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> 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
&
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 10:52:29AM +, Jamie Iles wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> A couple of questions inline, but otherwise looks nice!
Thanks for your review.
>
> Jamie
>
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 06:30:59PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > It support single core and
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 11:59:02AM -0800, Bryan Huntsman wrote:
> 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 s
On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 10:29:29AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Saturday 17 December 2011 16:00:03 Richard Zhao wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 08:32:35AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> > > On 12/16/2011 04:30 AM, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > > > It support single cor
Hi Bryan,
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 11:59:02AM -0800, Bryan Huntsman wrote:
> 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
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
arm registered cpufreq transition notifier to recalculate it.
Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
---
drivers/cpufreq/omap-cpufreq.c | 36
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/omap-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/omap
Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
---
arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi |5 -
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi
index 263e8f3..80e47b5 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts
arm registered cpufreq transition notifier to recalculate it.
Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
---
arch/arm/plat-mxc/cpufreq.c | 10 --
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-mxc/cpufreq.c b/arch/arm/plat-mxc/cpufreq.c
index c937e75..364793a 100644
The driver support single core and multi core ARM SoCs. For multi core,
it assume all cores share the same clock and voltage.
TODO:
- Add each core seperate freq/volt support (MSM).
Changes in v3:
- move adjusting smp loops_per_jiffy to arm common code,
and also adjust global loops_per_jiffy
If CONFIG_SMP, cpufreq skips loops_per_jiffy update, because different
arch has different per-cpu loops_per_jiffy definition.
Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
---
arch/arm/kernel/smp.c | 54 +
1 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff
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/bindings/cpufreq/generic-cpufreq|7 +
drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig|8 +
drivers/cpufreq
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
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:05:12AM +, Jamie Iles wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 11:21:40AM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > It support single core and multi-core ARM SoCs. But currently it assume
> > all cores share the same frequency and voltage.
&
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 09:00:44AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On 12/19/2011 08:39 AM, Jamie Iles wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:19:29PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> >> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:05:12AM +, Jamie Iles wrote:
> >>> Hi Richard,
> >&g
在 2011-12-20 下午11:22，"Arnd Bergmann" 写道：
>
> On Tuesday 20 December 2011, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > > >>>> +Generic cpufreq driver
> > > >>>> +
> > > >>>> +Required properties in /cpus/cpu@0:
> > > >>>
在 2011-12-20 下午11:13，"Rob Herring" 写道：
>
> On 12/19/2011 07:59 PM, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 09:00:44AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> >> On 12/19/2011 08:39 AM, Jamie Iles wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:19:29PM +0800, Richard
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 02:59:04PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 11:21:40AM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > It support single core and multi-core ARM SoCs. But currently it assume
> > all cores share the same frequency and voltage.
>
> My comments on th
Hi Mark,
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 11:48:45PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 07:27:03AM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 02:59:04PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > My comments on the previous version of the patch still apply:
&g
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 01:32:21AM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 09:20:46AM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 11:48:45PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > Note also that not all hardware specifies things in terms of a fixed set
>
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 02:33:36AM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 10:24:53AM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 01:32:21AM +, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > That's not the point - the point is that you may do something like
>
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 09:20:46AM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 11:48:45PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 07:27:03AM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 02:59:04PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
>
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 01:49:07PM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 13:12, Mark Brown
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 12:44:57PM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote:
> >
> >> We will convert all classes to buses over time time, and have a single
> >> type of device and a single type o
Hi Russel,
Are the patch #1 #2 #3 ok for you?
Thanks
Richard
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
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
Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
---
arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi |7 +++
1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi
index 263e8f3..2087db7 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts
Thanks Arnd, Mark, Jamie, Rob, for your review.
Changes in v4:
- add depends on HAVE_CLK && OF && REGULATOR
- add set_cpu_freq fail check
- regulator_put wehn module exit
- add pr_fmt and convert all printk to pr_xxx
- use voltage range
- comment and doc fix
- add cpu_volts value pre-check
If CONFIG_SMP, cpufreq skips loops_per_jiffy update, because different
arch has different per-cpu loops_per_jiffy definition.
Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
---
arch/arm/kernel/smp.c | 54 +
1 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff
arm registered cpufreq transition notifier to recalculate it.
Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
---
drivers/cpufreq/omap-cpufreq.c | 36
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/omap-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/omap
arm registered cpufreq transition notifier to recalculate it.
Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
---
arch/arm/plat-mxc/cpufreq.c | 10 --
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-mxc/cpufreq.c b/arch/arm/plat-mxc/cpufreq.c
index c937e75..364793a 100644
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
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
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.
>
> Re
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
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.
>
> >
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,
&g
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:
>
> >
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'
arm registered cpufreq transition notifier to recalculate it.
Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
---
drivers/cpufreq/omap-cpufreq.c | 36
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/omap-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/omap
The driver is based on clock and regulator APIs and support single core
and multi core ARM SoCs. For multi core, it assume all cores share the
same clock and voltage.
Thanks Arnd, Mark, Jamie, Rob, for your review.
Changes in V5:
- add more comments
- rename trans-latency to clk-trans-latency,
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
Reviewed-by: Jamie
If CONFIG_SMP, cpufreq skips loops_per_jiffy update, because different
arch has different per-cpu loops_per_jiffy definition.
Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
---
arch/arm/kernel/smp.c | 54 +
1 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff
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
Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
---
arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi |7 +++
1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi
index 263e8f3..d89b42d 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts
arm registered cpufreq transition notifier to recalculate it.
Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
---
arch/arm/plat-mxc/cpufreq.c | 10 --
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-mxc/cpufreq.c b/arch/arm/plat-mxc/cpufreq.c
index c937e75..364793a 100644
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
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 11:05:41PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 04:24:19PM +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
Hi Mark,
[...]
> + if (cpu_reg) {
> + ret = regulator_is_supported_voltage(cpu_reg,
> + cpu_volts[i * 2], cpu_volts[i * 2 + 1]);
Is there any reason you didn't export symbol regulator_is_supported_voltage?
and also it don't have !
On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 11:14:10AM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> [...]
> > + if (cpu_reg) {
> > + ret = regulator_is_supported_voltage(cpu_reg,
> > + cpu_volts[i * 2], cpu_volts[i * 2 + 1]);
>
On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 11:42:37AM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 11:31:29AM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 11:14:10AM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
>
> > > > + if (cpu_reg) {
> > &
On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 12:14:04PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 08:05:20PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
>
> Looks like the problem with your mail client is that it's wrapping at
> exactly 80 characters which is too little - you need to leave space for
> bei
There's still a bug that, after rmmod module, cpu0 still has cpufreq
sysfs entry.
cpufreq_unregister_driver can not clean up everything.
unfortunately, I don't have much time to debug cpufreq core.
Log:
root@ubuntu:~# insmod /clk-reg-cpufreq.ko
clk_reg_cpufreq: regulator cpu get failed.
trying
Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
---
arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi |7 +++
1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi
index 263e8f3..d89b42d 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts
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
The driver is based on clock and regulator APIs and support single core
and multi core ARM SoCs. For multi core, it assume all cores share the
same clock and voltage.
Thanks Arnd, Mark, Jamie, Shawn, Rob, for your review.
Changes in V6:
- add scaling_available_freqs
Changes in V5:
- add more
arm registered cpufreq transition notifier to recalculate it.
Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
---
arch/arm/plat-mxc/cpufreq.c | 10 --
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-mxc/cpufreq.c b/arch/arm/plat-mxc/cpufreq.c
index c937e75..364793a 100644
arm registered cpufreq transition notifier to recalculate it.
Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
---
drivers/cpufreq/omap-cpufreq.c | 36
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/omap-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/omap
If CONFIG_SMP, cpufreq skips loops_per_jiffy update, because different
arch has different per-cpu loops_per_jiffy definition.
Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
---
arch/arm/kernel/smp.c | 54 +
1 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff
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
Reviewed-by: Jamie
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
&
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 Zh
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 04:45:48PM -0800, Turquette, Mike wrote:
> 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_O
hi Russell,
May I have your ACK, you merge it?
Thanks
Richard
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 05:01:43PM -0800, Turquette, Mike wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 6:32 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On 01/03/2012 08:15 PM, Richard Zhao wrote:
> >> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 04:45:48PM -0800, Turquette, Mike wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Dec 14, 20
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 06:16:54AM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> hi Russell,
>
> May I have your ACK, you merge it?
Russell, ping
>
> Thanks
> Richard
>
> ___
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-ker
Hi Sascha & Shawn,
Could you look and ack the patch?
Thanks
Richard
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Hi Kevin,
Could you please look at and ack the patch if possible?
Sorry, I didn't cc you.
Thanks
Richard
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
On Fri, Jan 06, 2012 at 08:53:37AM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 06:16:54AM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > hi Russell,
> >
> > May I have your ACK, you merge it?
> Russell, ping
would you have time to look at this patch series?
>
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 03:22:34PM -0800, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Richard Zhao writes:
>
> > The driver get cpu operation point table from device tree cpu0 node,
>
> Since we already have an existing OPP infrastructure in the kernel,
> seems like this driver should get O
arm registered cpufreq transition notifier to recalculate it.
Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
---
drivers/cpufreq/omap-cpufreq.c | 36
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/omap-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/omap
The two patches were originally in [PATCH V6 0/7] add a generic cpufreq driver.
I seperated them and hope they can go to upstream earlier.
Richard Zhao (2):
ARM: add cpufreq transiton notifier to adjust loops_per_jiffy for smp
cpufreq: OMAP: remove loops_per_jiffy recalculate for smp
arch
If CONFIG_SMP, cpufreq skips loops_per_jiffy update, because different
arch has different per-cpu loops_per_jiffy definition.
Signed-off-by: Richard Zhao
Acked-by: Russell King
---
arch/arm/kernel/smp.c | 54 +
1 files changed, 54 insertions
by: Mike Turquette
> Acked-by: Shawn Guo
> Cc: Jeremy Kerr
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner
> Cc: Arnd Bergman
> Cc: Paul Walmsley
> Cc: Richard Zhao
> Cc: Saravana Kannan
> Cc: Magnus Damm
> Cc: Rob Herring
> Cc: Mark Brown
> Cc: Linus Walleij
> Cc: Stephen Boyd
> C
Hi Mike,
On Sat, Mar 03, 2012 at 12:29:00AM -0800, Mike Turquette wrote:
[snip]
> +static void __clk_disable(struct clk *clk)
> +{
> + if (!clk)
> + return;
> +
> + if (WARN_ON(clk->enable_count == 0))
> + return;
> +
> + if (--clk->enable_count > 0)
> +
Hello Mike,
The main interface for clk implementer is to register clocks dynamically.
I think it highly depends on clk DT bindings. From the patch Grant sent
out, it looks like he doesn't like one node per clk. So how do we
register clocks dynamically? You have any sample code?
Thanks
Richard
_
Looks like you didn't take my comments for v5.
http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg162903.html
Regards
Richard
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Hi Mike,
> +static int clk_divider_bestdiv(struct clk_hw *hw, unsigned long rate,
> + unsigned long *best_parent_rate)
> +{
> + struct clk_divider *divider = to_clk_divider(hw);
> + int i, bestdiv = 0;
> + unsigned long parent_rate, best = 0, now, maxdiv;
> +
> + maxdiv
[...]
> +static int clk_divider_bestdiv(struct clk_hw *hw, unsigned long rate,
> + unsigned long *best_parent_rate)
> +{
> + struct clk_divider *divider = to_clk_divider(hw);
> + int i, bestdiv = 0;
> + unsigned long parent_rate, best = 0, now, maxdiv;
> +
> + if (!rate)
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 10:21:19AM -0800, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Richard Zhao writes:
>
> > The two patches were originally in [PATCH V6 0/7] add a generic cpufreq
> > driver.
> > I seperated them and hope they can go to upstream earlier.
> >
> > Rich
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 03:26:56PM -0700, Mike Turquette wrote:
> From: Jeremy Kerr
>
> We currently have ~21 definitions of struct clk in the ARM architecture,
> each defined on a per-platform basis. This makes it difficult to define
> platform- (or architecture-) independent clock sources witho
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 03:26:57PM -0700, Mike Turquette wrote:
> From: Jeremy Kerr
>
> Implement clk_set_rate by adding a set_rate callback to clk_hw_ops.
> Rates are propagated down the clock tree and recalculated. Also adds a
> flag for signaling that parents must change rates to achieve the
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 03:26:59PM -0700, Mike Turquette wrote:
> From: Jeremy Kerr
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Kerr
> Signed-off-by: Mark Brown
> Signed-off-by: Jamie Iles
> Signed-off-by: Mike Turquette
> ---
> Changes since v1:
> Add copyright header
> Fold in Jamie's patch for set-to-disabl
Hi Mike,
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 03:26:56PM -0700, Mike Turquette wrote:
> From: Jeremy Kerr
>
> We currently have ~21 definitions of struct clk in the ARM architecture,
> each defined on a per-platform basis. This makes it difficult to define
> platform- (or architecture-) independent clock sou
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 11:05:04AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 04:10:26PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 03:26:56PM -0700, Mike Turquette wrote:
>
> snip essentially Mike's entire mail - *please* delete irrelevant quotes
> from
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 11:14:19AM -0700, Turquette, Mike wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 3:26 PM, Mike Turquette wrote:
> > From: Jeremy Kerr
> > struct clk_hw_ops {
> > int (*prepare)(struct clk_hw *);
> > void (*unprepare)(struct clk_hw *);
> > int
> - When I define a clk array, I don't need to find another place to store
> .ops.
^
remove "don't". sorry for that.
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listin
On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 08:26:49PM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 07:59:19AM -0700, Turquette, Mike wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 11:46 PM, Richard Zhao
> > wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 03:26:59PM -0700, Mike Turquette wrote:
On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 07:55:21PM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 06:32:33PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 11:05:04AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 04:10:26PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > > >
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 10:20:28AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 04:48:52PM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
>
> > For example, devices that possible access to on-chip RAM, depend on OCRAM
> > clock.
> > On imx53, VPU depends on OCRAM clock, even whe
On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 02:17:29PM -0700, Turquette, Mike wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 7:24 PM, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 11:14:19AM -0700, Turquette, Mike wrote:
> >> On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 3:26 PM, Mike Turquette wrote:
> >> unsigned l
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 03:26:56PM -0700, Mike Turquette wrote:
> +/* For USE_COMMON_STRUCT_CLK, these are provided in clk.c, but not exported
> + * through other headers; we don't want them used anywhere but here. */
> +#ifdef CONFIG_USE_COMMON_STRUCT_CLK
change to CONFIG_GENERIC_CLK?
> +extern in
Hi Amit,
Is there anyone working on a SoC bus framework?
The bus framework can manage the bus fabric, ddr, OCRAM clocks. When a
device driver become working, it tells bus framework, cpu may access
me (ip bus and related bus fabric on), I'm also a bus master, may
access ddr (ddr dma access +1 ). Fo
On 26 October 2011 14:39, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> On 11 Oct 26, Richard Zhao wrote:
>> Hi Amit,
>>
>> Is there anyone working on a SoC bus framework?
>> The bus framework can manage the bus fabric, ddr, OCRAM clocks. When a
>> device driver become working, it te
I saw a topic 'Multi-core decision co-ordination' at
https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/PowerManagement/Doc/CPUFreq .
Is it still going on?
Thanks
Richard
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listin
Hi Amit,
On 12 December 2011 15:21, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 6:59 AM, Richard Zhao wrote:
>> I saw a topic 'Multi-core decision co-ordination' at
>> https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/PowerManagement/Doc/CPUFreq .
>> Is it still goin
Hi Mike,
> + *
> + * @recalc_rate Recalculate the rate of this clock, by quering hardware
> + * and/or the clock's parent. It is up to the caller to insure
> + * that the prepare_mutex is held across this call. Returns the
> + * calculated rate. Optional, but re
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
1 - 100 of 115 matches
Mail list logo
