Sorry for the lack of response, it's been a busy week. I will get to this
soon.
-Frank
On 6/20/22 06:41, Clément Léger wrote:
> In order to be able to create new nodes and properties dynamically from
> drivers, add of_property_alloc/free() and of_node_alloc(). These
> functions can be used to cr
fer
> Cc: Michael Ellerman
> Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt
> Cc: Paul Mackerras
> Cc: Frank Rowand
> Cc: linux-m...@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
> Signed-off-by: Rob Herring
> ---
> v2:
> - ralink: Use 'if' instead of 'else if&#x
On 11/18/21 1:12 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> The early FDT scanning functions use of_scan_flat_dt() which implements
> its own node walking method. This function predates libfdt and is an
> unnecessary indirection. This series reworks
> early_init_dt_scan_chosen(), early_init_dt_scan_root(), and
>
fer
> Cc: Michael Ellerman
> Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt
> Cc: Paul Mackerras
> Cc: Frank Rowand
> Cc: linux-m...@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
> Signed-off-by: Rob Herring
> ---
> arch/mips/ralink/of.c | 16 ++---
> arch/powerpc/
chmidt
> Cc: Paul Mackerras
> Cc: Frank Rowand
> Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
> Signed-off-by: Rob Herring
> ---
> arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c | 4 ++--
> drivers/of/fdt.c | 14 +++---
> include/linux/of_fdt.h | 3 +--
> 3 files changed
errenschmidt
> Cc: Paul Mackerras
> Cc: Frank Rowand
> Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
> Signed-off-by: Rob Herring
> ---
> arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c | 2 +-
> arch/powerpc/mm/nohash/kaslr_booke.c | 4 +--
> drivers/of/fdt.c | 39 +++
Hi Geert,
On 11/10/21 11:23 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Currently struct of_device_id is 196 (32-bit) or 200 (64-bit) bytes
> large. It contains fixed-size strings for a name, a type, and a
> compatible value, but the first two are barely used.
> OF device ID tables contain multiple entries,
On 4/15/20 10:27 PM, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 4/8/20 10:22 AM, Frank Rowand wrote:
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> On 4/7/20 10:13 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>>> bugzilla-dae...@bugzilla.kernel.org writes:
>>>> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=206203
On 4/8/20 10:22 AM, Frank Rowand wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> On 4/7/20 10:13 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>> bugzilla-dae...@bugzilla.kernel.org writes:
>>> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=206203
>>>
>>> Erhard F. (erhar...@mailbox.org) ch
Hi Michael,
On 4/7/20 10:13 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> bugzilla-dae...@bugzilla.kernel.org writes:
>> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=206203
>>
>> Erhard F. (erhar...@mailbox.org) changed:
>>
>>What|Removed |Added
>> --
es and 'name' property?
> - Need how addresses work?
Looks good. Since this is a first pass, I'm expecting that polishing
(things like updating section numbers) would happen in subsequent
patches after more of the content changes are done, so no need
to do so in this patch.
R
+ Frank (me)
On 1/26/20 5:52 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> There's an OF helper called of_dma_is_coherent(), which checks if a
> device has a "dma-coherent" property to see if the device is coherent
> for DMA.
>
> But on some platforms devices are coherent by default, and on some
> platforms it
On 12/10/19 2:17 AM, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 12/9/19 7:51 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 7:35 AM Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2019-12-05 20:01:41 [-0600], Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>> Is there a memory usage
On 12/9/19 7:51 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 7:35 AM Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
> wrote:
>>
>> On 2019-12-05 20:01:41 [-0600], Frank Rowand wrote:
>>> Is there a memory usage issue for the systems that led to this thread?
>>
>> No, no memo
On 12/5/19 7:52 PM, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 12/3/19 10:56 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 10:28 PM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>
>>> On 12/2/19 10:12 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>>>> Frank Rowand writes:
>>>>> On 11/29/19 9:10
On 12/6/19 5:40 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Dec 05, 2019 at 07:37:24PM -0600, Frank Rowand wrote:
>> On 12/3/19 12:35 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>>> Btw. Some OFs mangle the phandles some way, to make it easier to catch
>>> people usin
On 12/5/19 10:35 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2019-12-03 10:56:35 [-0600], Rob Herring wrote:
>>> Another possibility would be to make the cache be dependent
>>> upon not CONFIG_PPC. It might be possible to disable the
>>> cache with a minimal code change.
>>
>> I'd rather not do that
On 12/3/19 10:56 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 10:28 PM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>> On 12/2/19 10:12 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>>> Frank Rowand writes:
>>>> On 11/29/19 9:10 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>>>>> I've
On 12/3/19 12:35 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 03:03:22PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>> Sebastian Andrzej Siewior writes:
>> I've certainly heard it said that on some OF's the phandle was just ==
>> the address of the internal representation, and I guess mayb
On 12/2/19 10:12 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Frank Rowand writes:
>> On 11/29/19 9:10 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>>> I've been looking at phandle_cache and noticed the following: The raw
>>> phandle value as generated by dtc starts at zero and is
On 11/29/19 9:10 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> I've been looking at phandle_cache and noticed the following: The raw
> phandle value as generated by dtc starts at zero and is incremented by
> one for each phandle entry. The qemu pSeries model is using Slof (which
> is probably the same thi
On 12/18/18 12:09 PM, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 12/18/18 12:01 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 12:57 PM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>
>>> On 12/17/18 2:52 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>>>> Hi Frank,
>>>>
>>>> frowand.l
On 12/18/18 12:01 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 12:57 PM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>> On 12/17/18 2:52 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>>> Hi Frank,
>>>
>>> frowand.l...@gmail.com writes:
>>>> From: Frank Rowand
>>>>
&
On 12/18/18 11:40 AM, frowand.l...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Frank Rowand
>
> Non-overlay dynamic devicetree node removal may leave the node in
> the phandle cache. Subsequent calls to of_find_node_by_phandle()
> will incorrectly find the stale entry. Remove the node from the
&g
On 12/18/18 11:40 AM, frowand.l...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Frank Rowand
>
> The phandle cache contains struct device_node pointers. The refcount
> of the pointers was not incremented while in the cache, allowing use
> after free error after kfree() of the node. Add the proper
On 12/17/18 2:52 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Hi Frank,
>
> frowand.l...@gmail.com writes:
>> From: Frank Rowand
>>
>> Non-overlay dynamic devicetree node removal may leave the node in
>> the phandle cache. Subsequent calls to of_find_node_by_phandle()
>>
On 12/14/18 2:47 PM, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 12/14/18 9:15 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 12:43 AM wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Frank Rowand
>>>
>>> The phandle cache contains struct device_node pointers. The refcount
>>>
On 12/14/18 9:15 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 12:43 AM wrote:
>>
>> From: Frank Rowand
>>
>> The phandle cache contains struct device_node pointers. The refcount
>> of the pointers was not incremented while in the cache, allowing use
>>
On 12/14/18 1:56 PM, Michael Bringmann wrote:
> On 12/14/2018 11:20 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 12:43 AM wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Frank Rowand
>>>
>>> Non-overlay dynamic devicetree node removal may leave the node i
Hi Michael Bringmann,
On 12/13/18 10:42 PM, frowand.l...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Frank Rowand
>
> Non-overlay dynamic devicetree node removal may leave the node in
> the phandle cache. Subsequent calls to of_find_node_by_phandle()
> will incorrectly find the stale entry. This
Hi Michael Bringmann,
On 12/11/18 8:07 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 7:29 AM Michael Ellerman wrote:
>>
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> Please Cc the device tree folks on device tree patches, and also the
>> original author of the patch that added the code you're modifying.
>>
>> So I've
Hi Rob,
I got the cc: list wrong on this patch, please dis-regard.
I will resend (with unchanged version) to the correct cc: list.
-Frank
On 11/26/18 3:54 AM, frowand.l...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Frank Rowand
>
> Add -T and --annotations command line arguments to dtx_dif
On 11/8/18 10:56 PM, Frank Rowand wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> Please pull the changes to add the overlay validation checks.
>
> This is the v7 version of the patch series.
>
> -Frank
>
>
> The following changes since commit 651022382c7f8da46cb4872a545ee1da6d097d2a:
>
, which are fixed in
separate patches.
Frank Rowand (17):
of: overlay: add tests to validate kfrees from overlay removal
of: overlay: add missing of_node_put() after add new node to changeset
of: overlay: add missing
On 11/7/18 4:09 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Frank Rowand writes:
>
>> Hi Michael, Ben, Paul,
>>
>> Do you know if anyone has tried this series on PowerPC?
>
> I have. No obvious breakage.
>
> My test does a loop of adding and removing multiple CPUs multip
On 11/7/18 4:23 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> frowand.l...@gmail.com writes:
>
>> From: Frank Rowand
>>
>> "of: overlay: add missing of_node_get() in __of_attach_node_sysfs"
>
> It would be clearer if you said 'The previous commit "of: overla
On 11/7/18 4:14 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> frowand.l...@gmail.com writes:
>
>> From: Frank Rowand
>>
>> There is a matching of_node_put() in __of_detach_node_sysfs()
>>
>> Remove misleading comment from function header comment for
>> of_detach_nod
On 11/7/18 4:08 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> frowand.l...@gmail.com writes:
>
>> From: Frank Rowand
>>
>> of_attach_node() and of_detach_node() always return zero, so
>> their return value is meaningless.
>
> But should they always return zero?
>
>
Hi Michael, Ben, Paul,
Do you know if anyone has tried this series on PowerPC?
Thanks,
-Frank
On 11/5/18 11:24 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 9:26 AM wrote:
>>
>> From: Frank Rowand
>>
>> Add checks to (1) overlay apply process and (2) memory free
On 10/18/18 15:46, frowand.l...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Frank Rowand
>
> Add checks to (1) overlay apply process and (2) memory freeing
> triggered by overlay release. The checks are intended to detect
> possible memory leaks and invalid overlays.
>
> The checks revealed
On 10/18/18 11:13, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 07:37:29PM -0700, frowand.l...@gmail.com wrote:
>> From: Frank Rowand
>>
>> If overlay properties #address-cells or #size-cells are already in
>> the live devicetree for any given node, then the values i
On 10/18/18 10:09, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 07:37:24PM -0700, frowand.l...@gmail.com wrote:
>> From: Frank Rowand
>>
>> "of: overlay: add missing of_node_get() in __of_attach_node_sysfs"
>> added a missing of_node_get() to __of_attac
On 10/18/18 10:05, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 07:37:22PM -0700, frowand.l...@gmail.com wrote:
>> From: Frank Rowand
>>
>> The refcount of a newly added overlay node decrements to one
>> (instead of zero) when the overlay changeset is destroyed. Th
On 10/18/18 10:03, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 07:37:21PM -0700, frowand.l...@gmail.com wrote:
>> From: Frank Rowand
>>
>> Add checks:
>> - attempted kfree due to refcount reaching zero before overlay
>> is removed
>> - properties
On 10/16/18 02:47, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> frowand.l...@gmail.com writes:
>
>> From: Frank Rowand
>>
>> Add checks to (1) overlay apply process and (2) memory freeing
>> triggered by overlay release. The checks are intended to detect
>> possible memory l
On 10/15/18 12:21, Alan Tull wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 7:26 PM wrote:
>>
>> From: Frank Rowand
>>
>> Add checks to (1) overlay apply process and (2) memory freeing
>> triggered by overlay release. The checks are intended to detect
>> possible memor
On 10/15/18 12:01, Alan Tull wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 7:26 PM wrote:
>>
>> From: Frank Rowand
>>
>> If overlay properties #address-cells or #size-cells are already in
>> the live devicetree for any given node, then the values in the
>> overlay
On 10/14/18 20:21, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 10/14/18 18:55, Joe Perches wrote:
>> On Sun, 2018-10-14 at 18:52 -0700, Frank Rowand wrote:
>>> On 10/14/18 18:06, Joe Perches wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 2018-10-14 at 17:24 -0700, frowand.l...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>
On 10/14/18 18:55, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Sun, 2018-10-14 at 18:52 -0700, Frank Rowand wrote:
>> On 10/14/18 18:06, Joe Perches wrote:
>>> On Sun, 2018-10-14 at 17:24 -0700, frowand.l...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> From: Frank Rowand
>>>>
>>>> Add
On 10/14/18 18:06, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Sun, 2018-10-14 at 17:24 -0700, frowand.l...@gmail.com wrote:
>> From: Frank Rowand
>>
>> Add test case of two fragments updating the same property. After
>> adding the test case, the system hangs at end of boot, after
>
On 10/13/18 11:21, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 10/13/18 05:51, Joe Perches wrote:
>> On Fri, 2018-10-12 at 21:53 -0700, frowand.l...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> From: Frank Rowand
>>>
>>> Multiple overlay fragments adding or deleting the same node is not
>>> s
On 10/13/18 05:51, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Fri, 2018-10-12 at 21:53 -0700, frowand.l...@gmail.com wrote:
>> From: Frank Rowand
>>
>> Multiple overlay fragments adding or deleting the same node is not
>> supported. Replace code comment of such, with check to detect
On 10/11/18 12:33, Alan Tull wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 12:39 AM Frank Rowand wrote:
>
> [resend of my messed up rejected email of a minute ago, sorry]
>
>>
>> On 10/10/18 14:03, Frank Rowand wrote:
< snip >
> I understand you're quite busy with al
+ devicetree mail list
On 10/11/18 06:22, Akshay Adiga wrote:
> From: Abhishek Goel
>
> This patch moves the saving and restoring of sprs for P9 cpuidle
> from kernel to opal.
> In an attempt to make the powernv idle code backward compatible,
> and to some extent forward compatible, add support
+ devicetree mail list
On 10/11/18 06:22, Akshay Adiga wrote:
> Passing pointer to the pnv_idle_state instead of psscr value and mask.
> This helps us to pass more information to the stop loop. This will help to
> figure out the method to enter/exit idle state.
>
> Signed-off-by: Akshay Adiga
>
+ devicetree mail list
On 10/11/18 06:22, Akshay Adiga wrote:
> This patch adds support for new device-tree format for idle state
> description.
>
> Previously if a older kernel runs on a newer firmware, it may enable
> all available states irrespective of its capability of handling it.
> New dev
+ devicetree mail list
On 10/11/18 06:22, Akshay Adiga wrote:
> Previously if a older kernel runs on a newer firmware, it may enable
> all available states irrespective of its capability of handling it.
> New device tree format adds a compatible flag, so that only kernel
> which has the capability
On 10/10/18 14:03, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 10/10/18 13:40, Alan Tull wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 1:49 AM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>
>>> On 10/09/18 23:04, frowand.l...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> From: Frank Rowand
>>>>
>>>>
>>&g
On 10/10/18 13:40, Alan Tull wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 1:49 AM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>> On 10/09/18 23:04, frowand.l...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> From: Frank Rowand
>>>
>>>
>>> "of: overlay: use prop add changeset entry for property in
On 10/09/18 23:04, frowand.l...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Frank Rowand
>
>
> "of: overlay: use prop add changeset entry for property in new nodes"
> fixed a problem where an 'update property' changeset entry was
> created for properties contained in nodes
On 10/09/18 13:28, Alan Tull wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 11:14 PM wrote:
>>
>> From: Frank Rowand
>>
>
> Hi Frank,
>
>> The changeset entry 'update property' was used for new properties in
>> an overlay instead of 'add property
On 10/08/18 11:46, Alan Tull wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 10:57 AM Alan Tull wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 11:14 PM wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Frank Rowand
>>>
>>> If overlay properties #address-cells or #size-cells are already in
>>
On 10/05/18 12:04, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 1:53 PM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>> On 10/05/18 08:07, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 11:14 PM wrote:
>>>>
>>>> From: Frank Rowand
>>>>
>>>> If
On 10/05/18 06:26, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 10/04/2018 09:12 PM, frowand.l...@gmail.com wrote:
>> From: Frank Rowand
>>
>> Callers of of_irq_parse_one() blindly use the pointer args.np
>> without checking whether of_irq_parse_one() had an error and
>> thus
On 10/05/18 07:53, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 11:14 PM wrote:
>>
>> From: Frank Rowand
>>
>> Callers of of_irq_parse_one() blindly use the pointer args.np
>> without checking whether of_irq_parse_one() had an error and
>> thus did not set
On 10/05/18 08:07, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 11:14 PM wrote:
>>
>> From: Frank Rowand
>>
>> If overlay properties #address-cells or #size-cells are already in
>> the live devicetree for any given node, then the values in the
>> overlay
+ Frank
On 09/27/18 15:25, Li Yang wrote:
> Hi Rob and Grant,
>
> Various device tree specs are recommending to include all the
> potential compatible strings in the device node, with the order from
> most specific to most general. But it looks like Linux kernel doesn't
> provide a way to bind
On 09/18/18 11:55, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 2:32 PM Frank Rowand wrote:
>>
>> On 09/13/18 13:28, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> Major changes are I2C and SPI bus checks, YAML output format (for
>>> future validation), some new libfdt functions, and m
On 09/13/18 13:28, Rob Herring wrote:
> Major changes are I2C and SPI bus checks, YAML output format (for
> future validation), some new libfdt functions, and more libfdt
> validation of dtbs.
>
> The YAML addition adds an optional dependency on libyaml. pkg-config is
> used to test for it and pkg
f
> of_find_node_by_phandle()")
> Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org # 4.17+
> Reported-by: Finn Thain
> Tested-by: Stan Johnson
> Cc: Frank Rowand
> Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt
> Signed-off-by: Rob Herring
> ---
> Here's a formal patch of what Stan tested. Will send to
dex 9095b8290150..74eaedd5b860 100644
> --- a/drivers/of/base.c
> +++ b/drivers/of/base.c
> @@ -140,6 +140,9 @@ void of_populate_phandle_cache(void)
> if (np->phandle && np->phandle != OF_PHANDLE_ILLEGAL)
> phandles++;
>
> + if (!phandles)
> + goto out;
> +
> cache_entries = roundup_pow_of_two(phandles);
> phandle_cache_mask = cache_entries - 1;
>
>
Thanks Rob! That fix makes sense, and the test results look
promising.
Reviewed-by: Frank Rowand
On 09/09/18 10:04, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Fri, 2018-08-31 at 14:58 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>>
>>> A long shot, but something to consider, is that I failed to cover the
>>> cases of dynamic devicetree updates (removing nodes that contain a
>>> phandle) in ways other than ove
Hi Finn,
On 08/29/18 17:44, Finn Thain wrote:
> Hi Frank,
>
> Linux v4.17 and later will no longer boot on a G3 PowerMac. The boot hangs
> very early, before any video driver loads.
>
> Stan and I were able to bisect the regression between v4.16 and v4.17 and
> arrived at commit 0b3ce78e90fc (
On 07/31/18 12:18, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 07/31/18 07:17, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 12:34 AM Michael Ellerman
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Rob/Frank,
>>>
>>> I think we might have a problem with the phandle_cache not interacting
&
lar fix as this commit did for overlays:
>
> commit b9952b5218added5577e4a3443969bc20884cea9
> Author: Frank Rowand
> Date: Thu Jul 12 14:00:07 2018 -0700
>
> of: overlay: update phandle cache on overlay apply and remove
>
> A comment in the review of the patch addi
On 01/25/18 15:53, Tyrel Datwyler wrote:
> On 01/25/2018 01:49 PM, Frank Rowand wrote:
>> Hi Wolfram,
>>
>> On 01/25/18 03:03, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>>> On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 22:55:13 -0800
>>> Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Steve,
>&g
On 01/25/18 15:14, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>
>> This means that ftrace can not be used for the of_node_get(),
>> of_node_put(), and of_node_release() debug info, because
>> these functions are called before early_initcall().
>
> For the record: You can still unbind/bind devices. This is how I
> debug
On 01/25/18 15:12, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> Frank,
>
> here seems to be a misunderstanding going on. I don't want to push this
> patch upstream against all odds. I merely wanted to find out what the
> status of this patch is. Because one possibility was that it had just
> been forgotten...
>
>>> So,
On 01/25/18 14:40, Tyrel Datwyler wrote:
> On 01/24/2018 10:48 PM, Frank Rowand wrote:
>> On 01/21/18 06:31, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>>> From: Tyrel Datwyler
>>>
>>> This patch introduces event tracepoints for tracking a device_nodes
>>> reference cycle a
Hi Wolfram,
On 01/25/18 03:03, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 22:55:13 -0800
> Frank Rowand wrote:
>
>> Hi Steve,
>
>>
>> Off the top of your head, can you tell me know early in the boot
>> process a trace_event can be called and successfully p
On 01/21/18 06:31, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> From: Tyrel Datwyler
>
> This patch introduces event tracepoints for tracking a device_nodes
> reference cycle as well as reconfig notifications generated in response
> to node/property manipulations.
>
> With the recent upstreaming of the refcount API se
On 01/25/18 00:01, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Frank,
>
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 7:48 AM, Frank Rowand wrote:
>>> create mode 100644 include/trace/events/of.h
>>
>> mode looks incorrect. Existing files in include/trace/events/ are -rw-rw
>
> Not in
On 01/24/18 22:48, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 01/21/18 06:31, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>> From: Tyrel Datwyler
>>
>> This patch introduces event tracepoints for tracking a device_nodes
>> reference cycle as well as reconfig notifications generated in response
>&g
Hi Steve,
On 01/21/18 06:31, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> I got a bug report for a DT node refcounting problem in the I2C subsystem.
> This
> patch was a huge help in validating the bug report and the proposed solution.
> So, I thought I bring it to attention again. Thanks Tyrel, for the initial
> work!
On 01/21/18 06:31, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> From: Tyrel Datwyler
>
> This patch introduces event tracepoints for tracking a device_nodes
> reference cycle as well as reconfig notifications generated in response
> to node/property manipulations.
>
> With the recent upstreaming of the refcount API se
On 01/21/18 06:31, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> I got a bug report for a DT node refcounting problem in the I2C subsystem.
> This
> patch was a huge help in validating the bug report and the proposed solution.
> So, I thought I bring it to attention again. Thanks Tyrel, for the initial
> work!
>
> Note
On 01/22/18 03:49, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> Hi Frank,
>
>> Please go back and read the thread for version 1. Simply resubmitting a
>> forward port is ignoring that whole conversation.
>>
>> There is a lot of good info in that thread. I certainly learned stuff in it.
>
> Yes, I did that and learned
On 01/23/18 04:11, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Wolfram Sang writes:
>
>> Hi Frank,
>>
>>> Please go back and read the thread for version 1. Simply resubmitting a
>>> forward port is ignoring that whole conversation.
>>>
>>> There is a lot of good info in that thread. I certainly learned stuff in
On 01/21/18 06:31, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> I got a bug report for a DT node refcounting problem in the I2C subsystem.
> This
> patch was a huge help in validating the bug report and the proposed solution.
> So, I thought I bring it to attention again. Thanks Tyrel, for the initial
> work!
>
> Note
On 10/19/17 13:06, Moritz Fischer wrote:
< snip >
> We also have plenty of code that is just not aware of overlays, and
> assumes certain parts of the tree to stay static.
I would state that somewhat differently. :-) There is very little
code that is aware of overlays, and most code assumes th
On 10/18/17 11:30, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 10:53 AM, Pantelis Antoniou
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 2017-10-18 at 10:44 -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 10:12 AM, Alan Tull wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 6:51 PM, Frank Rowan
On 10/18/17 11:39, Alan Tull wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 10:53 AM, Pantelis Antoniou
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 2017-10-18 at 10:44 -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 10:12 AM, Alan Tull wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 6:51 PM, Frank Rowand
On 10/17/17 14:46, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 4:32 PM, Alan Tull wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 10:16 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
>>
>> Hi Rob,
>>
>>> With dependencies on a statically allocated full path name converted to
>>> use %pOF format specifier, we can store just the basen
Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Hi Frank,
>
> frowand.l...@gmail.com writes:
>> From: Frank Rowand
>>
>> Remove "phandle", "linux,phandle", and "ibm,phandle" properties from
>> the internal device tree. The phandle will still be in the struct
>>
Hi Rob,
On 07/25/17 14:44, Rob Herring wrote:
> This series is the last steps to remove storing the full path for every
> DT node. Instead, we can create full path strings dynamically as needed
> with printf %pOF specifiers (commit ce4fecf1fe15). There are a number of
> remaining direct users o
adding Ben and Paul.
Hi Michael,
On 06/20/17 21:57, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Hi Frank,
>
> frowand.l...@gmail.com writes:
>> From: Frank Rowand
>>
>> Remove "phandle", "linux,phandle", and "ibm,phandle" properties from
>> the
On 06/20/17 23:18, Frank Rowand wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> Michael has an issue that means this patch series is not OK in the
> current form. I will work on a v7 to see if I can resolve the
> issue.
>
> -Frank
< snip >
Hi Rob,
The issue is in patch 1. Patches 2 - 4 ar
Hi Rob,
Michael has an issue that means this patch series is not OK in the
current form. I will work on a v7 to see if I can resolve the
issue.
-Frank
On 06/20/17 21:57, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Hi Frank,
>
> frowand.l...@gmail.com writes:
>> From: Frank Rowand
>&g
On 06/18/17 07:05, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 07:49:04PM -0700, frowand.l...@gmail.com wrote:
>> From: Frank Rowand
>>
>> The Devicetree Specification has superseded the ePAPR as the
>> base specification for bindings. Update files in Documentat
On 04/20/17 09:51, Tyrel Datwyler wrote:
> On 04/19/2017 09:43 PM, Frank Rowand wrote:
>
< snip >
>> The call stack could easily be post-processed, for example using addr2line.
>> Here is the call stack for when the refcount incremented to 23 from 22 (or
>>
1 - 100 of 122 matches
Mail list logo
