From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann) Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 16:15:20 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 18/19] ARM: at91: suspend both memory controllers on at91sam9263 In-Reply-To: <516FF8FC.7070901@atmel.com> References: <1359123276-15833-1-git-send-email-arnd@arndb.de> <1359153858-31992-19-git-send-email-arnd@arndb.de> <516FF8FC.7070901@atmel.com> Message-ID: <201304181615.20542.arnd@arndb.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thursday 18 April 2013, Nicolas Ferre wrote: > > This patch blindly removes the warning and changes the > > at91sam9263 to use the same code at at91sam9g45, which > > may or may not be the right solution. If it is not, > > maybe someone could provide a better fix. > > Maybe you can remove this paragraph: now you are using the proper fix > with proper RAM type. > > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann > > Cc: Nicolas Ferre > > Acked-by: Nicolas Ferre > > What is the future of this patch series: do you want us to take this > patch separately or to you want to apply the whole series on the arm-soc > tree? I'd prefer if you could just apply or forward it to an appropriate tree. Most of the other patches have found their way into mainline by now. > > Cc: Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard > > Cc: Andrew Victor > > Cc: Albin Tonnerre > > Cc: Daniel Lezcano > > Moreover, this patch my conflict with Daniel's current initiative to > move cpuidle driver to its own directory: how do we coordinate with each > other? Maybe you can make sure it actually works and send it to Daniel to apply on top of his other patches? Arnd From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S966666Ab3DROPj (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Apr 2013 10:15:39 -0400 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.8]:59827 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965049Ab3DROPi (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Apr 2013 10:15:38 -0400 From: Arnd Bergmann To: Nicolas Ferre Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/19] ARM: at91: suspend both memory controllers on at91sam9263 Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 16:15:20 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.2 (Linux/3.8.0-18-generic; KDE/4.3.2; x86_64; ; ) Cc: "Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard" , Daniel Lezcano , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Victor , Albin Tonnerre References: <1359123276-15833-1-git-send-email-arnd@arndb.de> <1359153858-31992-19-git-send-email-arnd@arndb.de> <516FF8FC.7070901@atmel.com> In-Reply-To: <516FF8FC.7070901@atmel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201304181615.20542.arnd@arndb.de> X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:mBrg2x15Wqk+oZy3VGGn/Jt3Wuxo/KQFqobLWlQghBG DwBvTv+012S5qGWGBgEdJHuBLtl1/QgOAIy9ANgG37RbHfEvoq 3dCaL+GB8aHTIm2WdH9eoVO4r5ND6Yj1uFWrRXZKENfvURRk4E KMlttNCN8fM64nKkywjsW0h0iLxhqyg1BiPkatZIbbTj7qOMEn 2dfhKIm6VfpQVKgZxS8ucO9ZpkiHB+/Y1tqkC2nh/EOxayc/wu mxi2yJBvW+72J/XQOwZUUMA2lxRHVuTma1tKm+V0qEmTJYuSUK aSHWNwvtAtCyrM6i9Q+wRm64oJYuGDv9aAdGjK4iSpBXewQ0El xyBAM2D/DFRGIKk22mvg= Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 18 April 2013, Nicolas Ferre wrote: > > This patch blindly removes the warning and changes the > > at91sam9263 to use the same code at at91sam9g45, which > > may or may not be the right solution. If it is not, > > maybe someone could provide a better fix. > > Maybe you can remove this paragraph: now you are using the proper fix > with proper RAM type. > > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann > > Cc: Nicolas Ferre > > Acked-by: Nicolas Ferre > > What is the future of this patch series: do you want us to take this > patch separately or to you want to apply the whole series on the arm-soc > tree? I'd prefer if you could just apply or forward it to an appropriate tree. Most of the other patches have found their way into mainline by now. > > Cc: Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard > > Cc: Andrew Victor > > Cc: Albin Tonnerre > > Cc: Daniel Lezcano > > Moreover, this patch my conflict with Daniel's current initiative to > move cpuidle driver to its own directory: how do we coordinate with each > other? Maybe you can make sure it actually works and send it to Daniel to apply on top of his other patches? Arnd