Hi Tomasz, On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 2:52 AM, Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Abhilash, > > On 13.05.2014 14:01, Abhilash Kesavan wrote: >> Rebased on >> 1] Kukjin Kim's tree for-next branch (which has Sachin Kamat's SYSRAM >> patches merged) with Tomasz Figa's samsung clock tree (samsung-next branch) >> merged. >> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/kgene/linux-samsung.git/log/?h=for-next >> 2] Pankaj Dubey's v4 PMU patchset >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/10/29 > > I think this patch is not safe to base on yet. I need to find time to > review the latest version and share my latest view on this with Pankaj, > as I have a bit different design in mind. OK, do you think the PMU series might make it this cycle or should I drop this as a dependency and re-base my patches just on Daniel's CPUIdle consolidation. Regards, Abhilash > > In general, I don't like the fact that you end up with using regmap to > access registers that are used exclusively by PMU driver or for accesses > happening at late suspend or early resume, where concurrent accesses > from other drivers simply can't occur. > > Best regards, > Tomasz > > _______________________________________________ > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |