lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Sep]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/4] mfd: dbx500: Provide a more accurate smp_twd clock
Hi Mike,

On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 09:42:31AM -0700, Mike Turquette wrote:
> Quoting Samuel Ortiz (2012-09-19 09:02:51)
> > Hi Ulf,
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 02:21:30PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > > From: Michel Jaouen <michel.jaouen@stericsson.com>
> > >
> > > The local timer clock is based on ARM subsystem clock. This patch
> > > obtains a more exact value of that clock by reading PRCMU registers.
> > > Using this increases the accuracy of the local timer events.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
> > > Signed-off-by: Rickard Andersson <rickard.andersson@stericsson.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Michel Jaouen <michel.jaouen@stericsson.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > drivers/mfd/dbx500-prcmu-regs.h | 4 +++-
> > > include/linux/mfd/dbx500-prcmu.h | 1 +
> > > 3 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c b/drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c
> > > index 4f74529..e7f9539 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c
> > > @@ -418,6 +418,9 @@ static struct {
> > >
> > > static atomic_t ac_wake_req_state = ATOMIC_INIT(0);
> > >
> > > +/* Functions definition */
> > > +static void compute_armss_rate(void);
> > > +
> > I'm not a big fan of forward declarations, but I still applied your patch to
> > my for-next branch. Thanks.
> >
>
> Samuel,
>
> Not sure if you were Cc'd on the rest of the patches in this series but
> after some discussion (see patch #1) I took all four patches into
> clk-next, including the MFD change. This was done first week of
> September. At this point those patches have shifted into my stable
> branch that I have promised not to rebase (for arm-soc dependencies).
>
> Are you OK with me taking this patch through the clk-next branch?
Yes, I'm fine with it.

Cheers,
Samuel.

--
Intel Open Source Technology Centre
http://oss.intel.com/


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-09-19 19:41    [W:0.040 / U:1.388 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site