On Mon, 28 Nov 2016, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > Well, I admit it would be nicer if drivers didn't have to worry about
> > whether or not CONFIG_PM was enabled. A slightly cleaner approach
> > from the one outlined above would have the probe routine do this:
> >
> > my_power_up(dev);
> >
Hi Alan,
On Saturday 26 Nov 2016 15:10:28 Alan Stern wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Nov 2016, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Friday 25 Nov 2016 10:21:21 Alan Stern wrote:
> >> On Fri, 25 Nov 2016, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 09:15:39PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Nov 2016
On Fri, 25 Nov 2016, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Alan,
Hello.
> On Friday 25 Nov 2016 10:21:21 Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 Nov 2016, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 09:15:39PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > >> On Fri, 25 Nov 2016, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > >>> Dear linux-
Hi Alan,
On Friday 25 Nov 2016 10:21:21 Alan Stern wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Nov 2016, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 09:15:39PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> >> On Fri, 25 Nov 2016, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> >>> Dear linux-pm developers, what's the suggested way to ensure that a
> >>> run
On Fri, 25 Nov 2016, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> Hi Alan and others,
>
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 09:15:39PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 Nov 2016, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> >
> > > Dear linux-pm developers, what's the suggested way to ensure that a
> > > runtime-
> > > pm-enabled driver ca
Hi Alan and others,
On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 09:15:39PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Nov 2016, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>
> > Dear linux-pm developers, what's the suggested way to ensure that a runtime-
> > pm-enabled driver can run fine on a system with CONFIG_PM disabled ?
>
> The exact
On Fri, 25 Nov 2016, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Dear linux-pm developers, what's the suggested way to ensure that a runtime-
> pm-enabled driver can run fine on a system with CONFIG_PM disabled ?
The exact point of your question isn't entirely clear. In the most
literal sense, the best ways to e
Hello,
(CC'ing the linux-pm mailing list)
On Tuesday 22 Nov 2016 21:58:32 Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 22, 2016 8:31:42 PM CET Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> >>> @@ -2915,7 +2906,11 @@ static int smiapp_probe(struct i2c_client
> >>> *client,
> >>>
> >>> pm_runtime_enable(&client->d
On Tuesday, November 22, 2016 8:31:42 PM CET Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > @@ -2915,7 +2906,11 @@ static int smiapp_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
> > >
> > > pm_runtime_enable(&client->dev);
> > >
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_PM
> > > rval = pm_runtime_get_sync(&client->dev);
> > > +#else
> >
Hi Arnd,
On Friday 18 Nov 2016 17:09:01 Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Friday, November 18, 2016 3:50:16 PM CET Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > Power on the sensor when the module is loaded and power it off when it is
> > removed.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sakari Ailus
> > ---
> > Hi Arnd and others,
> >
> > T
On Friday, November 18, 2016 3:50:16 PM CET Sakari Ailus wrote:
> Power on the sensor when the module is loaded and power it off when it is
> removed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sakari Ailus
> ---
> Hi Arnd and others,
>
> The patch is tested with CONFIG_PM set, as the system does I was testing
> on did
Power on the sensor when the module is loaded and power it off when it is
removed.
Signed-off-by: Sakari Ailus
---
Hi Arnd and others,
The patch is tested with CONFIG_PM set, as the system does I was testing
on did not boot with CONFIG_PM disabled. I'm not really too worried about
this though, t
12 matches
Mail list logo