Hi, On 27-02-17 11:25, Takashi Iwai wrote:
On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 10:38:29 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:index a8e74ca..a4ac473 100644 --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-core.h +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-core.h @@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ * @pm_qos: pm_qos_request used while holding a hardware lock on the bus * @acquire_lock: function to acquire a hardware lock on the bus * @release_lock: function to release a hardware lock on the bus - * @pm_runtime_disabled: true if pm runtime is disabled + * @pm_disabled: true if power-management should be disabled for this i2c-bus * * HCNT and LCNT parameters can be used if the platform knows more accurate * values than the one computed based only on the input clock frequency. @@ -127,7 +127,7 @@ struct dw_i2c_dev { struct pm_qos_request pm_qos; int (*acquire_lock)(struct dw_i2c_dev *dev); void (*release_lock)(struct dw_i2c_dev *dev); - bool pm_runtime_disabled; + bool pm_disabled; bool dynamic_tar_update_enabled;I couldn't find this dynamic_tar_update_enabled field in your previous patchset. What am I missing?
My testing branch for all this stuff is based on intel-drm-next-queued, which is still based on 4.10-rc$, and it seems that 4.11-rc1 will have this: https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit?id=12688dc21f71f4dcc9e2b8b5556b0c6cc8df1491 Removing the dynamic_tar_update_enabled member from that struct. I will send out a new rebased version when 4.11-rc1 gets merged in intel-drm-next-queued. Regards, Hans _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
