| Message ID | CAMQu2gzCz+bS7U1ypFWzcp3zTpkfHdPzZfFtJ8Cd4ap8FSzJQg@mail.gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Tony, On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 12:05 PM, Shilimkar, Santosh <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 5:04 AM, Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com> wrote: > > > > The wakeupgen context-save code reads and stores the AUXCOREBOOT0 and > > AUXCOREBOOT1 register contents twice. This seems like a waste of > > time, so, remove the duplicates. > > > > Signed-off-by: Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com> > > Cc: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> > > --- > Looks fine to me. Thanks Paul. > Reviewed-by: Santosh Shilimkar ,santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> > > While reviewing your patch, i noticed a typo in the code. > Since the patch fixes nearby code as the subject patch, I generated > that patch on top of yours. Same is end of the email as well as > attachment. The patch applies on top of your patch. > > Regards > Santosh > > From 5fcd24e5782e502aa607b73de78be68b394f9639 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> > Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 11:51:34 +0530 > Subject: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP4: wakeupgen: Fix the typo in AUXCOREBOOT > register > save > > The wakeupgen context-save code reads AUXCOREBOOT0 register > instead of AUXCOREBOOT1 register contents while saving AUXCOREBOOT1. > > Fix the same. > > Signed-off-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> > --- Will you able to pick up these couple of wakeupgen fixes from here or do you want me to send you a pull request for 3.6-rc5/6 Regards Santosh
* Shilimkar, Santosh <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> [120908 01:20]: > > Will you able to pick up these couple of wakeupgen fixes from here or > do you want me to send you a pull request for 3.6-rc5/6 I can pick them into fixes-noncritical. But if the second one is a major bug for the -rc series, the patch should be describe what breaks (regression? oops?). Regards, Tony
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 12:25 AM, Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> wrote: > * Shilimkar, Santosh <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> [120908 01:20]: >> >> Will you able to pick up these couple of wakeupgen fixes from here or >> do you want me to send you a pull request for 3.6-rc5/6 > > I can pick them into fixes-noncritical. But if the second one is > a major bug for the -rc series, the patch should be describe what > breaks (regression? oops?). > Fixes non critical is fine. No major issue without these patches. Regards Santosh
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote: > On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 12:25 AM, Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> wrote: > > * Shilimkar, Santosh <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> [120908 01:20]: > >> > >> Will you able to pick up these couple of wakeupgen fixes from here or > >> do you want me to send you a pull request for 3.6-rc5/6 > > > > I can pick them into fixes-noncritical. But if the second one is > > a major bug for the -rc series, the patch should be describe what > > breaks (regression? oops?). > > > Fixes non critical is fine. No major issue without these patches. There's an ordering constraint though: Santosh's patch needs to go in first, then mine. - Paul
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com> wrote: > On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 12:25 AM, Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> wrote: >> > * Shilimkar, Santosh <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> [120908 01:20]: >> >> >> >> Will you able to pick up these couple of wakeupgen fixes from here or >> >> do you want me to send you a pull request for 3.6-rc5/6 >> > >> > I can pick them into fixes-noncritical. But if the second one is >> > a major bug for the -rc series, the patch should be describe what >> > breaks (regression? oops?). >> > >> Fixes non critical is fine. No major issue without these patches. > > There's an ordering constraint though: Santosh's patch needs to go in > first, then mine. > Its other way round ;-) Mine I created after applying your change. Regards Santosh
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote: > On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com> wrote: > > On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote: > > > >> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 12:25 AM, Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> wrote: > >> > * Shilimkar, Santosh <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> [120908 01:20]: > >> >> > >> >> Will you able to pick up these couple of wakeupgen fixes from here or > >> >> do you want me to send you a pull request for 3.6-rc5/6 > >> > > >> > I can pick them into fixes-noncritical. But if the second one is > >> > a major bug for the -rc series, the patch should be describe what > >> > breaks (regression? oops?). > >> > > >> Fixes non critical is fine. No major issue without these patches. > > > > There's an ordering constraint though: Santosh's patch needs to go in > > first, then mine. > > > Its other way round ;-) > Mine I created after applying your change. The problem is that if my patch is applied first, then there will be a point after my patch where the AUXCOREBOOT1 register won't be saved, which might break PM. So the patches may need to be updated. - Paul
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap-wakeupgen.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap-wakeupgen.c index b55432d..567f672 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap-wakeupgen.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap-wakeupgen.c @@ -229,7 +229,7 @@ static inline void omap4_irq_save_context(void) /* Save AuxBoot* registers */ val = __raw_readl(wakeupgen_base + OMAP_AUX_CORE_BOOT_0); __raw_writel(val, sar_base + AUXCOREBOOT0_OFFSET); - val = __raw_readl(wakeupgen_base + OMAP_AUX_CORE_BOOT_0); + val = __raw_readl(wakeupgen_base + OMAP_AUX_CORE_BOOT_1); __raw_writel(val, sar_base + AUXCOREBOOT1_OFFSET); /* Save SyncReq generation logic */