From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg KH Subject: Re: patch "tty: serial: OMAP: ensure FIFO levels are set correctly in non-DMA" added to tty tree Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 11:16:04 -0800 Message-ID: <20120126191604.GA15516@suse.de> References: <13274430881471@kroah.org> <20120126042155.GA3185@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:45762 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752232Ab2AZTU1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jan 2012 14:20:27 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-serial-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-serial@vger.kernel.org To: Paul Walmsley Cc: govindraj.raja@ti.com, khilman@ti.com, tomi.valkeinen@ti.com, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 09:31:53PM -0700, Paul Walmsley wrote: > On Wed, 25 Jan 2012, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 08:02:09PM -0700, Paul Walmsley wrote: > > > On Tue, 24 Jan 2012, gregkh@suse.de wrote: > > > > > > > > This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled > > > > > > > > tty: serial: OMAP: ensure FIFO levels are set correctly in non-DMA > > > > > > > > to my tty git tree which can be found at > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/tty.git > > > > in the tty-linus branch. > > > > > > If it's not too late, I was wondering if you could drop this patch and the > > > subsequent one ("tty: serial: OMAP: transmit FIFO threshold interrupts > > > don't wake the"), in favor of the second version of this series that was > > > just posted at > > > > > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-arm-kernel&m=132754676814391&w=2 > > > > > > If it is too late, we'll deal with it in 3.4. > > > > What is wrong with the patches that I applied? > > A new workaround is used that reduces the number of interrupts to normal. > The commit messages are improved since we have a better idea of what was > wrong. There is also a new patch (patch 3) for a power management > regression in the driver. > > > How about a fix-up patch on top of what I have applied instead of whole > > new ones? > > That's fine, if that's your preference. It will be several patches, > though. And about 75% of the previous series would be reverted, since a > different workaround would be used. > > Let me know if that is indeed what you'd like. Ok, I've just reverted both of these patches for now, please send new ones when you have them. thanks, greg k-h