> The part I'm not clear what the purpose of "pool-hwlock" was.
One use-case was a set of hwlocks having no fixed purpose, and being
available for dynamic allocation between the OS and other entities (e.g.
some RTOS on another core).
The set of locks forming a reusable pool, and any information a
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 10:30:16PM +, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> Add binding documentation for the Qualcomm Hardware Mutex.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Andersson
> ---
>
> I think the conclusion on the dt binding discussion for hwspinlocks was that
> we're down to having the #hwlock-cells intact.
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 5:23 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 10:04 PM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
>> Mark, are you OK with the latest iteration from Suman? it would be
>> nice to get your +1 just to make sure we don't merge stuff you're
>> uncomfortable with.
>
> Quick update:
>
> A
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 10:18 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:
>> On Feb 27, 2015, at 4:30 PM, Bjorn Andersson
>> wrote:
>>
>> Add binding documentation for the Qualcomm Hardware Mutex.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Andersson
>> —
>>
>
> Acked-by: Kumar Gala
Perfect, thanks a lot, Kumar.
--
To unsubscribe
> On Feb 27, 2015, at 4:30 PM, Bjorn Andersson
> wrote:
>
> Add binding documentation for the Qualcomm Hardware Mutex.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Andersson
> —
>
Acked-by: Kumar Gala
- k
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Auro
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 10:04 PM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
> Mark, are you OK with the latest iteration from Suman? it would be
> nice to get your +1 just to make sure we don't merge stuff you're
> uncomfortable with.
Quick update:
As Tim pointed out, we can move forward with the driver binding patc
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 7:48 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> Based on the long discussion we had on one of the previous iterations
> of Suman's DT binding, with the DT maintainers I believe that it would
> be fine to move along and sent Suman's patches to Linus - without an
> explicit Ack from the DT
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 9:31 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Tim Bird wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 6:55 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 9:11 PM, Tim Bird wrote:
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 9:40 PM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
> Sorry, I can't t
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Tim Bird wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 6:55 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 9:11 PM, Tim Bird wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 9:40 PM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
Sorry, I can't take this without a DT ack.
>>>
>>> Hmmm.
>>>
>>> The policy s
On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 6:55 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 9:11 PM, Tim Bird wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 9:40 PM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
>>> Sorry, I can't take this without a DT ack.
>>
>> Hmmm.
>>
>> The policy seems to be:
>> "For driver (not subsystem) bindings:
On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 9:11 PM, Tim Bird wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 9:40 PM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
>> Sorry, I can't take this without a DT ack.
>
> Hmmm.
>
> The policy seems to be:
> "For driver (not subsystem) bindings: If you are comfortable with the
> binding, and it hasn't re
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 9:40 PM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 12:32 AM, Tim Bird wrote:
>> I didn't see an Ack from Mark or Rob. But I did see a question from
>> Mark and response from Bjorn.
>>
>> Ohad - did you take this or are you still waiting for something?
>>
>> Who should
On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 12:32 AM, Tim Bird wrote:
> I didn't see an Ack from Mark or Rob. But I did see a question from
> Mark and response from Bjorn.
>
> Ohad - did you take this or are you still waiting for something?
>
> Who should I pester about this? :-)
Sorry, I can't take this without a D
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 2:29 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
> Hi Mark, Rob,
>
> On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 12:30 AM, Bjorn Andersson
> wrote:
>> Add binding documentation for the Qualcomm Hardware Mutex.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Andersson
>> ---
>>
>> I think the conclusion on the dt binding discussio
On 2/27/2015 3:30 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
Add binding documentation for the Qualcomm Hardware Mutex.
Signed-off-by: Bjorn Andersson
---
Reviewed-by: Jeffrey Hugo
--
Jeffrey Hugo
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora
Forum, a
On Thu 12 Mar 02:51 PDT 2015, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 10:30:16PM +, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> > Add binding documentation for the Qualcomm Hardware Mutex.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Bjorn Andersson
> > ---
> >
> > I think the conclusion on the dt binding discussion for hwsp
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 10:30:16PM +, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> Add binding documentation for the Qualcomm Hardware Mutex.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Andersson
> ---
>
> I think the conclusion on the dt binding discussion for hwspinlocks was that
> we're down to having the #hwlock-cells intact.
Hi Mark, Rob,
On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 12:30 AM, Bjorn Andersson
wrote:
> Add binding documentation for the Qualcomm Hardware Mutex.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Andersson
> ---
>
> I think the conclusion on the dt binding discussion for hwspinlocks was that
> we're down to having the #hwlock-cells i
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 02:30:16PM -0800, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> Add binding documentation for the Qualcomm Hardware Mutex.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Andersson
> ---
Looks fine.
Reviewed-by: Andy Gross
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of t
Add binding documentation for the Qualcomm Hardware Mutex.
Signed-off-by: Bjorn Andersson
---
I think the conclusion on the dt binding discussion for hwspinlocks was that
we're down to having the #hwlock-cells intact. So this version includes that,
but non of the other previously discussed prope
20 matches
Mail list logo
