Hi,
On 29.04.2016 00:27, Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Ivaylo Dimitrov <ivo.g.dimitrov.75@xxxxxxxxx> [160428 14:21]:
I didn't test legacy boot, as I don't really see any value of doing it now
the end of the legacy boot is near, the driver does not function correctly,
however the patchset at least allows for the driver to be build and we have
something to improve on. And I am going to send a patch that fixes the
problem with omap_dm_timer_request_specific(). So, for both patches, you may
add:
Tested-by: Ivaylo Dimitrov <ivo.g.dimitrov.75@xxxxxxxxx>
OK thanks.
Mauro, do the driver changes look OK to you?
If so, I could queue the driver too for v4.7 because of the
dependency with your ack. Or I can provide you an immutable
branch with just the pdata changes against v4.6-rc1 if you
prefer that.
In the meanwhile I was able to make the driver functional (on top of the
$subject series) - for that purpose I had to fix dmtimer.c - it turns
out that PM runtime get()/put() is called in almost every function
exported by dmtimer, which in turn slows down IR transmission to 4-5s
instead of 0.5s. I also replaced GPT9 dmtimer with PWM framework API
(pwm-omap-dmtimer needs a patch) and implemented some DT support.
Now, how shall I proceed with those - wait for the $subject series to be
accepted or post the patches now?
Tony, I was unable to find the tree on kernel.org your patches are in.
Which tree to use to base my patches on?
Thanks,
Ivo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
