All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Turquette <mturquette@linaro.org>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
	"Geert Uytterhoeven" <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
	"Laurent Pinchart" <Laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
	"Magnus Damm" <magnus.damm@gmail.com>
Cc: "Stephen Boyd" <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
	"Simon Horman" <horms@verge.net.au>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	"Kevin Hilman" <khilman@kernel.org>,
	"Ulf Hansson" <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>,
	linux-clk@vger.kernel.org,
	"Linux PM list" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Linux-sh list" <linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/14] ARM: shmobile: Add CPG Clock Domains
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 13:46:17 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150622204617.9112.71054@quantum> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdXntR6c4-uUNGVGx7D7941e8hvnmtVBvDu2+iUsNHQ=Qw@mail.gmail.com>

Quoting Geert Uytterhoeven (2015-06-15 09:15:04)
> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 8:53 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven
> <geert+renesas@glider.be> wrote:
> >         Hi all,
> >
> > This patch series adds Clock Domain support to the Clock Pulse Generator
> > (CPG) Module Stop (MSTP) Clocks driver using the generic PM Domain, to
> > be used on shmobile SoCs without device power domains (R-Car Gen1 and
> > Gen2, RZ).  This allows to power-manage the module clocks of SoC devices
> > that are part of the CPG Clock Domain using Runtime PM, or for system
> > suspend/resume, similar to SoCs with device power domains (SH-Mobile and
> > R-Mobile).
> >
> > SoC devices that are part of the CPG Clock Domain and can be
> > power-managed through an MSTP clock are tagged in DT with a proper
> > "power-domains" property. This applies to most on-SoC devices, which
> > have a one-to-one mapping from SoC device to DT device node.
> > Notable exceptions are "display" and "sound" device nodes, which
> > represent multiple SoC devices, each having their own MSTP clocks. Hence
> > drivers for such devices still have to manage their (multiple module)
> > clocks themselves.
> >
> > The (MSTP) clock to use for power-management is found by scanning for
> > clocks that are compatible with "renesas,cpg-mstp-clocks".
> > Before, the "first" clock tied to each device (con_id NULL) was used,
> > being a bit ad-hoc. It was suggested to use the "fck" clock instead,
> > but this may conflict with DT bindings for devices we don't control
> > (e.g. GIC-400 plans to mandate "clk" for the clk-name of its single
> > clock). Looking for real MSTP clocks avoids this problem.
> >
> > Logically, the CPG Clock Domain operates on the SoC CPG/MSTP block.
> > As there's no single device node in DT representing this block (there
> > are separate device nodes for the CPG and for the individual MSTP
> > clocks), I bound the logic to the CPG device node.
> > Perhaps this is something we should change for future SoCs?
> 

Hello Geert,

I'm still going through this series but I have a few comments/questions.

> Inside Renesas, we've been discussing this face-to-face, but haven't
> reached a conclusion yet.
> 
> In Linux terminology, "PM domain" is a higher-level abstraction than
> just (hardware) "power domain" (sometimes called "power area").
> A "PM domain" is any collection of devices that are power-managed
> similarly. As such it covers not only hardware power domains, but also
> clock domains, and even firmware controlled devices (e.g. as used by the
> Linux ACPI subsystem).
> 
> I find it a bit unfortunate this was not reflected in the DT bindings
> for Generic PM domains, which use "power-domains" properties, making
> believe people this is about hardware power domains only.

"Power island" is used commonly to describe the hardware power domain.
I like that one since it conveys the concept of power isolation/clamping
in a power distribution network.  It might be more clear to refer to the
hardware as power islands and reserve "power domains" for the Linux
construct?

> 
> One other point of confusion is that there are multiple kernel
> subsystems that can (or seem to be able to) be used for the same
> purpose. Both regulators and power domains are used to "control power".
> The same is true for clocks vs. clock domains.
> My point of view is that the regulator and clock subsystems are more
> about the properties of regulators (voltage, current) resp. clocks
> (frequencies), while power/clock domains are about being active or
> inactive.

Only speaking for the clock framework, but the prepare/unprepare and
enable/disable semantics are very important here, not just the
rate-change stuff.

> 
> On Renesas SoCs (SH/R-Mobile, R-Car, RZ), the MSTP (Module Standby and
> Software Reset) block is very intimately tied to the CPG (Clock Pulse
> Generator) block.
> 
> The MSTP block provides two functions:
>   1. Module Standby: "Clock supply to specified modules is stopped by
>      setting the module stop control register bits."
>      However, the clock supply to a module is not stopped until all CPUs
>      in the SoC agree.  Indeed, there are separate MSTP registers for
>      application (Cortex-A) and real-time (SH and/or Cortex-R) cores.
>   2. Reset control. to perform a software reset of a specific module.
> 
> Given the second function, perhaps the MSTP bits shouldn't have been
> moduled as clocks, but it made sense at the time of introduction, and
> IMHO it still does.

Does the clk.enable_count refcount for an MSTP "clock" mirror your
statement, "the clock supply to a module is not stopped until all CPUs
in the SoC agree"? Put another way, is it possble in a shmobile system
for an MSTP "clock" to have an enable_count of zero, but still by
physically enabled in hardware?

Regards,
Mike
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michael Turquette <mturquette@linaro.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/14] ARM: shmobile: Add CPG Clock Domains
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 20:46:17 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150622204617.9112.71054@quantum> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdXntR6c4-uUNGVGx7D7941e8hvnmtVBvDu2+iUsNHQ=Qw@mail.gmail.com>

Quoting Geert Uytterhoeven (2015-06-15 09:15:04)
> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 8:53 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven
> <geert+renesas@glider.be> wrote:
> >         Hi all,
> >
> > This patch series adds Clock Domain support to the Clock Pulse Generator
> > (CPG) Module Stop (MSTP) Clocks driver using the generic PM Domain, to
> > be used on shmobile SoCs without device power domains (R-Car Gen1 and
> > Gen2, RZ).  This allows to power-manage the module clocks of SoC devices
> > that are part of the CPG Clock Domain using Runtime PM, or for system
> > suspend/resume, similar to SoCs with device power domains (SH-Mobile and
> > R-Mobile).
> >
> > SoC devices that are part of the CPG Clock Domain and can be
> > power-managed through an MSTP clock are tagged in DT with a proper
> > "power-domains" property. This applies to most on-SoC devices, which
> > have a one-to-one mapping from SoC device to DT device node.
> > Notable exceptions are "display" and "sound" device nodes, which
> > represent multiple SoC devices, each having their own MSTP clocks. Hence
> > drivers for such devices still have to manage their (multiple module)
> > clocks themselves.
> >
> > The (MSTP) clock to use for power-management is found by scanning for
> > clocks that are compatible with "renesas,cpg-mstp-clocks".
> > Before, the "first" clock tied to each device (con_id NULL) was used,
> > being a bit ad-hoc. It was suggested to use the "fck" clock instead,
> > but this may conflict with DT bindings for devices we don't control
> > (e.g. GIC-400 plans to mandate "clk" for the clk-name of its single
> > clock). Looking for real MSTP clocks avoids this problem.
> >
> > Logically, the CPG Clock Domain operates on the SoC CPG/MSTP block.
> > As there's no single device node in DT representing this block (there
> > are separate device nodes for the CPG and for the individual MSTP
> > clocks), I bound the logic to the CPG device node.
> > Perhaps this is something we should change for future SoCs?
> 

Hello Geert,

I'm still going through this series but I have a few comments/questions.

> Inside Renesas, we've been discussing this face-to-face, but haven't
> reached a conclusion yet.
> 
> In Linux terminology, "PM domain" is a higher-level abstraction than
> just (hardware) "power domain" (sometimes called "power area").
> A "PM domain" is any collection of devices that are power-managed
> similarly. As such it covers not only hardware power domains, but also
> clock domains, and even firmware controlled devices (e.g. as used by the
> Linux ACPI subsystem).
> 
> I find it a bit unfortunate this was not reflected in the DT bindings
> for Generic PM domains, which use "power-domains" properties, making
> believe people this is about hardware power domains only.

"Power island" is used commonly to describe the hardware power domain.
I like that one since it conveys the concept of power isolation/clamping
in a power distribution network.  It might be more clear to refer to the
hardware as power islands and reserve "power domains" for the Linux
construct?

> 
> One other point of confusion is that there are multiple kernel
> subsystems that can (or seem to be able to) be used for the same
> purpose. Both regulators and power domains are used to "control power".
> The same is true for clocks vs. clock domains.
> My point of view is that the regulator and clock subsystems are more
> about the properties of regulators (voltage, current) resp. clocks
> (frequencies), while power/clock domains are about being active or
> inactive.

Only speaking for the clock framework, but the prepare/unprepare and
enable/disable semantics are very important here, not just the
rate-change stuff.

> 
> On Renesas SoCs (SH/R-Mobile, R-Car, RZ), the MSTP (Module Standby and
> Software Reset) block is very intimately tied to the CPG (Clock Pulse
> Generator) block.
> 
> The MSTP block provides two functions:
>   1. Module Standby: "Clock supply to specified modules is stopped by
>      setting the module stop control register bits."
>      However, the clock supply to a module is not stopped until all CPUs
>      in the SoC agree.  Indeed, there are separate MSTP registers for
>      application (Cortex-A) and real-time (SH and/or Cortex-R) cores.
>   2. Reset control. to perform a software reset of a specific module.
> 
> Given the second function, perhaps the MSTP bits shouldn't have been
> moduled as clocks, but it made sense at the time of introduction, and
> IMHO it still does.

Does the clk.enable_count refcount for an MSTP "clock" mirror your
statement, "the clock supply to a module is not stopped until all CPUs
in the SoC agree"? Put another way, is it possble in a shmobile system
for an MSTP "clock" to have an enable_count of zero, but still by
physically enabled in hardware?

Regards,
Mike
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sh" in

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: mturquette@linaro.org (Michael Turquette)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 00/14] ARM: shmobile: Add CPG Clock Domains
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 13:46:17 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150622204617.9112.71054@quantum> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdXntR6c4-uUNGVGx7D7941e8hvnmtVBvDu2+iUsNHQ=Qw@mail.gmail.com>

Quoting Geert Uytterhoeven (2015-06-15 09:15:04)
> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 8:53 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven
> <geert+renesas@glider.be> wrote:
> >         Hi all,
> >
> > This patch series adds Clock Domain support to the Clock Pulse Generator
> > (CPG) Module Stop (MSTP) Clocks driver using the generic PM Domain, to
> > be used on shmobile SoCs without device power domains (R-Car Gen1 and
> > Gen2, RZ).  This allows to power-manage the module clocks of SoC devices
> > that are part of the CPG Clock Domain using Runtime PM, or for system
> > suspend/resume, similar to SoCs with device power domains (SH-Mobile and
> > R-Mobile).
> >
> > SoC devices that are part of the CPG Clock Domain and can be
> > power-managed through an MSTP clock are tagged in DT with a proper
> > "power-domains" property. This applies to most on-SoC devices, which
> > have a one-to-one mapping from SoC device to DT device node.
> > Notable exceptions are "display" and "sound" device nodes, which
> > represent multiple SoC devices, each having their own MSTP clocks. Hence
> > drivers for such devices still have to manage their (multiple module)
> > clocks themselves.
> >
> > The (MSTP) clock to use for power-management is found by scanning for
> > clocks that are compatible with "renesas,cpg-mstp-clocks".
> > Before, the "first" clock tied to each device (con_id NULL) was used,
> > being a bit ad-hoc. It was suggested to use the "fck" clock instead,
> > but this may conflict with DT bindings for devices we don't control
> > (e.g. GIC-400 plans to mandate "clk" for the clk-name of its single
> > clock). Looking for real MSTP clocks avoids this problem.
> >
> > Logically, the CPG Clock Domain operates on the SoC CPG/MSTP block.
> > As there's no single device node in DT representing this block (there
> > are separate device nodes for the CPG and for the individual MSTP
> > clocks), I bound the logic to the CPG device node.
> > Perhaps this is something we should change for future SoCs?
> 

Hello Geert,

I'm still going through this series but I have a few comments/questions.

> Inside Renesas, we've been discussing this face-to-face, but haven't
> reached a conclusion yet.
> 
> In Linux terminology, "PM domain" is a higher-level abstraction than
> just (hardware) "power domain" (sometimes called "power area").
> A "PM domain" is any collection of devices that are power-managed
> similarly. As such it covers not only hardware power domains, but also
> clock domains, and even firmware controlled devices (e.g. as used by the
> Linux ACPI subsystem).
> 
> I find it a bit unfortunate this was not reflected in the DT bindings
> for Generic PM domains, which use "power-domains" properties, making
> believe people this is about hardware power domains only.

"Power island" is used commonly to describe the hardware power domain.
I like that one since it conveys the concept of power isolation/clamping
in a power distribution network.  It might be more clear to refer to the
hardware as power islands and reserve "power domains" for the Linux
construct?

> 
> One other point of confusion is that there are multiple kernel
> subsystems that can (or seem to be able to) be used for the same
> purpose. Both regulators and power domains are used to "control power".
> The same is true for clocks vs. clock domains.
> My point of view is that the regulator and clock subsystems are more
> about the properties of regulators (voltage, current) resp. clocks
> (frequencies), while power/clock domains are about being active or
> inactive.

Only speaking for the clock framework, but the prepare/unprepare and
enable/disable semantics are very important here, not just the
rate-change stuff.

> 
> On Renesas SoCs (SH/R-Mobile, R-Car, RZ), the MSTP (Module Standby and
> Software Reset) block is very intimately tied to the CPG (Clock Pulse
> Generator) block.
> 
> The MSTP block provides two functions:
>   1. Module Standby: "Clock supply to specified modules is stopped by
>      setting the module stop control register bits."
>      However, the clock supply to a module is not stopped until all CPUs
>      in the SoC agree.  Indeed, there are separate MSTP registers for
>      application (Cortex-A) and real-time (SH and/or Cortex-R) cores.
>   2. Reset control. to perform a software reset of a specific module.
> 
> Given the second function, perhaps the MSTP bits shouldn't have been
> moduled as clocks, but it made sense at the time of introduction, and
> IMHO it still does.

Does the clk.enable_count refcount for an MSTP "clock" mirror your
statement, "the clock supply to a module is not stopped until all CPUs
in the SoC agree"? Put another way, is it possble in a shmobile system
for an MSTP "clock" to have an enable_count of zero, but still by
physically enabled in hardware?

Regards,
Mike

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michael Turquette <mturquette@linaro.org>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
	"Geert Uytterhoeven" <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
	"Laurent Pinchart" <Laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
	"Magnus Damm" <magnus.damm@gmail.com>
Cc: "Stephen Boyd" <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
	"Simon Horman" <horms@verge.net.au>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	"Kevin Hilman" <khilman@kernel.org>,
	"Ulf Hansson" <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>,
	linux-clk@vger.kernel.org,
	"Linux PM list" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Linux-sh list" <linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/14] ARM: shmobile: Add CPG Clock Domains
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 13:46:17 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150622204617.9112.71054@quantum> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdXntR6c4-uUNGVGx7D7941e8hvnmtVBvDu2+iUsNHQ=Qw@mail.gmail.com>

Quoting Geert Uytterhoeven (2015-06-15 09:15:04)
> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 8:53 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven
> <geert+renesas@glider.be> wrote:
> >         Hi all,
> >
> > This patch series adds Clock Domain support to the Clock Pulse Generator
> > (CPG) Module Stop (MSTP) Clocks driver using the generic PM Domain, to
> > be used on shmobile SoCs without device power domains (R-Car Gen1 and
> > Gen2, RZ).  This allows to power-manage the module clocks of SoC devices
> > that are part of the CPG Clock Domain using Runtime PM, or for system
> > suspend/resume, similar to SoCs with device power domains (SH-Mobile and
> > R-Mobile).
> >
> > SoC devices that are part of the CPG Clock Domain and can be
> > power-managed through an MSTP clock are tagged in DT with a proper
> > "power-domains" property. This applies to most on-SoC devices, which
> > have a one-to-one mapping from SoC device to DT device node.
> > Notable exceptions are "display" and "sound" device nodes, which
> > represent multiple SoC devices, each having their own MSTP clocks. Hence
> > drivers for such devices still have to manage their (multiple module)
> > clocks themselves.
> >
> > The (MSTP) clock to use for power-management is found by scanning for
> > clocks that are compatible with "renesas,cpg-mstp-clocks".
> > Before, the "first" clock tied to each device (con_id NULL) was used,
> > being a bit ad-hoc. It was suggested to use the "fck" clock instead,
> > but this may conflict with DT bindings for devices we don't control
> > (e.g. GIC-400 plans to mandate "clk" for the clk-name of its single
> > clock). Looking for real MSTP clocks avoids this problem.
> >
> > Logically, the CPG Clock Domain operates on the SoC CPG/MSTP block.
> > As there's no single device node in DT representing this block (there
> > are separate device nodes for the CPG and for the individual MSTP
> > clocks), I bound the logic to the CPG device node.
> > Perhaps this is something we should change for future SoCs?
> 

Hello Geert,

I'm still going through this series but I have a few comments/questions.

> Inside Renesas, we've been discussing this face-to-face, but haven't
> reached a conclusion yet.
> 
> In Linux terminology, "PM domain" is a higher-level abstraction than
> just (hardware) "power domain" (sometimes called "power area").
> A "PM domain" is any collection of devices that are power-managed
> similarly. As such it covers not only hardware power domains, but also
> clock domains, and even firmware controlled devices (e.g. as used by the
> Linux ACPI subsystem).
> 
> I find it a bit unfortunate this was not reflected in the DT bindings
> for Generic PM domains, which use "power-domains" properties, making
> believe people this is about hardware power domains only.

"Power island" is used commonly to describe the hardware power domain.
I like that one since it conveys the concept of power isolation/clamping
in a power distribution network.  It might be more clear to refer to the
hardware as power islands and reserve "power domains" for the Linux
construct?

> 
> One other point of confusion is that there are multiple kernel
> subsystems that can (or seem to be able to) be used for the same
> purpose. Both regulators and power domains are used to "control power".
> The same is true for clocks vs. clock domains.
> My point of view is that the regulator and clock subsystems are more
> about the properties of regulators (voltage, current) resp. clocks
> (frequencies), while power/clock domains are about being active or
> inactive.

Only speaking for the clock framework, but the prepare/unprepare and
enable/disable semantics are very important here, not just the
rate-change stuff.

> 
> On Renesas SoCs (SH/R-Mobile, R-Car, RZ), the MSTP (Module Standby and
> Software Reset) block is very intimately tied to the CPG (Clock Pulse
> Generator) block.
> 
> The MSTP block provides two functions:
>   1. Module Standby: "Clock supply to specified modules is stopped by
>      setting the module stop control register bits."
>      However, the clock supply to a module is not stopped until all CPUs
>      in the SoC agree.  Indeed, there are separate MSTP registers for
>      application (Cortex-A) and real-time (SH and/or Cortex-R) cores.
>   2. Reset control. to perform a software reset of a specific module.
> 
> Given the second function, perhaps the MSTP bits shouldn't have been
> moduled as clocks, but it made sense at the time of introduction, and
> IMHO it still does.

Does the clk.enable_count refcount for an MSTP "clock" mirror your
statement, "the clock supply to a module is not stopped until all CPUs
in the SoC agree"? Put another way, is it possble in a shmobile system
for an MSTP "clock" to have an enable_count of zero, but still by
physically enabled in hardware?

Regards,
Mike
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-06-22 20:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 84+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-05-28 18:53 [PATCH v2 00/14] ARM: shmobile: Add CPG Clock Domains Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53 ` [PATCH v2 01/14] clk: shmobile: Add CPG Clock Domain support Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-22 15:07   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-22 15:07     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-22 15:07     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-22 15:07     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-22 15:07     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53 ` [PATCH v2 02/14] clk: shmobile: r8a7778: " Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53 ` [PATCH v2 03/14] clk: shmobile: r8a7779: " Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53 ` [PATCH v2 04/14] clk: shmobile: rcar-gen2: " Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53 ` [PATCH v2 05/14] clk: shmobile: rz: " Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53 ` [PATCH v2 06/14] ARM: shmobile: r7s72100 dtsi: Add CPG Clock Domain Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53 ` [PATCH v2 07/14] ARM: shmobile: r8a7778 " Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53 ` [PATCH v2 08/14] ARM: shmobile: r8a7779 " Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53 ` [PATCH v2 09/14] ARM: shmobile: r8a7790 " Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53 ` [PATCH v2 10/14] ARM: shmobile: r8a7791 " Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53 ` [PATCH v2 11/14] ARM: shmobile: r8a7794 " Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53 ` [PATCH v2 12/14] drivers: sh: Stop using pm_runtime.c for multi-platform shmobile with genpd Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-15 19:44   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-15 19:44     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-15 19:44     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53 ` [PATCH v2 13/14] clk: shmobile: mstp: Consider "zb_clk" suitable for power management Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-22 20:05   ` Michael Turquette
2015-06-22 20:05     ` Michael Turquette
2015-06-22 20:05     ` Michael Turquette
2015-06-22 20:05     ` Michael Turquette
2015-06-22 20:05     ` Michael Turquette
2015-06-22 20:17     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-22 20:17       ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-22 20:17       ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-22 20:17       ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-22 20:17       ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53 ` [PATCH v2 14/14] ARM: shmobile: R-Mobile: Use CPG Clock Domain attach/detach helpers Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-05-28 18:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-08 21:42 ` [PATCH v2 00/14] ARM: shmobile: Add CPG Clock Domains Stephen Boyd
2015-06-08 21:42   ` Stephen Boyd
2015-06-08 21:42   ` Stephen Boyd
2015-06-15 16:15 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-15 16:15   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-15 16:15   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-15 16:15   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-15 18:39   ` Kevin Hilman
2015-06-15 18:39     ` Kevin Hilman
2015-06-15 18:39     ` Kevin Hilman
2015-06-15 18:39     ` Kevin Hilman
2015-06-22 20:46   ` Michael Turquette [this message]
2015-06-22 20:46     ` Michael Turquette
2015-06-22 20:46     ` Michael Turquette
2015-06-22 20:46     ` Michael Turquette
2015-06-23  8:59     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-23  8:59       ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-23  8:59       ` Geert Uytterhoeven

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20150622204617.9112.71054@quantum \
    --to=mturquette@linaro.org \
    --cc=Laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=geert+renesas@glider.be \
    --cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
    --cc=horms@verge.net.au \
    --cc=khilman@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-clk@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=magnus.damm@gmail.com \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=ulf.hansson@linaro.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.