All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
To: Liu Ying <liu.y.victor@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org,
	Zhang Lily-R58066 <r58066@freescale.com>,
	Arnaud Patard <arnaud.patard@rtp-net.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] Add a mfd IPUv3 driver
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 09:40:24 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101214084024.GS6017@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimuchaGAEuGX24GSnAu5-FVtG_kE_KDozGKo9e-@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 12:05:07PM +0800, Liu Ying wrote:
> Hello, Sascha,
> 
> Please find my feedback with [LY] embedded.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Liu Ying
> 
> 2010/12/13 Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>:
> > Hi Liu Ying,
> >
> > Thanks for looking at the patches.
> [LY] You are welcome.
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 01:21:57PM +0800, Liu Ying wrote:
> >> Hello, Sascha,
> >>
> >> IPU is not embedded in i,MX50 SoC, but in i.MX51/53 SoCs, please
> >> modify the commit message.
> >>
> >> I have the following comments for the files editted respectively:
> >> 1) ipu-common.c
> >>     - ipu_idmac_get()/ipu_idmac_put() need a mechanism to protect IPU
> >> IDMAC resources, namely, get rid of potential race condition issue. As
> >> only framebuffer support is added in your patches, there should be no
> >> race condition issue now. After IC channels are supported(maybe as DMA
> >> engine), perhaps, there will be such kind of issue.
> >
> > ok.
> >
> >>     - ipu_idmac_select_buffer() need to add spinlock to protect
> >> IPU_CHA_BUFx_RDY registers.
> >
> > ok.
> >
> >>     - It looks that ipu_uninit_channel() only clears
> >> IPU_CHA_DB_MODE_SEL register, so why not put it in
> >> ipu_idmac_disable_channel()?
> >
> > ok.
> >
> >>     - It looks that ipu_add_client_devices() and your framebuffer
> >> patch assume /dev/fb0 uses DP_BG, /dev/fb1 uses DP_FG and /dev/fb2
> >> uses DC.
> >>       But fb1_platform_data->ipu_channel_bg is
> >> MX51_IPU_CHANNEL_MEM_DC_SYNC, this may make confusion for driver
> >> readers and it is not easy for code maintenance.
> >
> > Do you have a better suggestion? fb2 becomes fb1 when overlay support
> > is not used.
> [LY] How about assigning DP-BG to /dev/fb0, DC to /dev/fb1 and DP_FG
> to /dev/fb2?
> >
> >>     - It also looks that ipu_add_client_devices() and your framebuffer
> >> driver assume DP_BG/DP_FG are bound with DI0 and DC is bound with DI1.
> >>       It is ok for babbage board to support this kind of
> >> configuration, but it may bring some limitation. For example, TVE(TV
> >> encoder) module embedded in MX51 SoC can only connected with DI1 and
> >> users may like to use TV as the primary device(support HW overlay),
> >> and FSL Android BSP does support to use DI1 with LCD as the primary
> >> device on babbage board.
> >
> > SO we need to put the display number into the platform data, right?
> [LY] Yes, I think so. As the primary display port could be DI0 or DI1
> on boards like babbage board(two display ports are used), the primary
> display number in platform data should be configurable(I'm not sure
> whether this can be accepted by community), perhaps, configured by
> kernel bootup command line.

Ok, I'll find a solution for this.

> >
> >>
> >> 2) ipu-cpmem.c
> >>     - In order to improve performance, maybe writing
> >> ipu_ch_param_addr(ch) directly will be fine, but not using memset()
> >> and memcpy() in ipu_ch_param_init().
> >
> > I don't see this function in any performance critical path.
> [LY] Yes, currently, this function is not in performance critical
> path, so it is ok for me now. However, after IC/IRT channels are
> involved, the channels' idmac configuration might be changed from time
> to time and frequently, as the channels could be used as dma engine.

We are talking about 60 frames per second at maximum, right? So the
channel would be reconfigured 60 times a second, that's still not
performance critical, at least not if we are talking about a 100 byte or
something memset.

> >
> >>
> >> 3) ipu-dc.c
> >>     - Looks '#include <asm/atomic.h>' and '#include
> >> <linux/spinlock.h>' are unnecessary.
> >>     - Need to call 'ipu_module_disable(IPU_CONF_DC_EN);' somewhere.
> >
> > ok.
> >
> >>
> >> 4) ipu-di.c
> >>     - Looks '#include <asm/atomic.h>' and '#include <linux/delay.h>'
> >> are unnecessary.
> >
> > ok.
> >
> >>
> >> 5) ipu-dmfc.c
> >>     - Looks '#include <linux/delay.h>' are unnecessary.
> >
> > ok.
> >
> >>
> >> 6) ipu-dp.c
> >>     - Looks '#include <asm/atomic.h>' and '#include <linux/delay.h>'
> >> are unnecessary.
> >
> > ok.
> >
> >>
> >> 7) ipu-prv.h
> >>     - Looks '#include <linux/interrupt.h>' is unnecessary.
> >>     - Please rename 'MX51_IPU_CHANNEL_xxxx' to be 'IPU_CHANNEL_xxxx',
> >> IPUv3 channel names do not depend on SoC name.
> >
> > I was proven wrong each time I believed this.
> [LY] What if IPUv3 will be embedded in more SoCs? Could you please
> tell the reason? Thanks.

Then channel assignments will change, I'll promise.

Sascha


-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] Add a mfd IPUv3 driver
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 08:40:24 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101214084024.GS6017@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimuchaGAEuGX24GSnAu5-FVtG_kE_KDozGKo9e-@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 12:05:07PM +0800, Liu Ying wrote:
> Hello, Sascha,
> 
> Please find my feedback with [LY] embedded.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Liu Ying
> 
> 2010/12/13 Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>:
> > Hi Liu Ying,
> >
> > Thanks for looking at the patches.
> [LY] You are welcome.
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 01:21:57PM +0800, Liu Ying wrote:
> >> Hello, Sascha,
> >>
> >> IPU is not embedded in i,MX50 SoC, but in i.MX51/53 SoCs, please
> >> modify the commit message.
> >>
> >> I have the following comments for the files editted respectively:
> >> 1) ipu-common.c
> >>     - ipu_idmac_get()/ipu_idmac_put() need a mechanism to protect IPU
> >> IDMAC resources, namely, get rid of potential race condition issue. As
> >> only framebuffer support is added in your patches, there should be no
> >> race condition issue now. After IC channels are supported(maybe as DMA
> >> engine), perhaps, there will be such kind of issue.
> >
> > ok.
> >
> >>     - ipu_idmac_select_buffer() need to add spinlock to protect
> >> IPU_CHA_BUFx_RDY registers.
> >
> > ok.
> >
> >>     - It looks that ipu_uninit_channel() only clears
> >> IPU_CHA_DB_MODE_SEL register, so why not put it in
> >> ipu_idmac_disable_channel()?
> >
> > ok.
> >
> >>     - It looks that ipu_add_client_devices() and your framebuffer
> >> patch assume /dev/fb0 uses DP_BG, /dev/fb1 uses DP_FG and /dev/fb2
> >> uses DC.
> >>       But fb1_platform_data->ipu_channel_bg is
> >> MX51_IPU_CHANNEL_MEM_DC_SYNC, this may make confusion for driver
> >> readers and it is not easy for code maintenance.
> >
> > Do you have a better suggestion? fb2 becomes fb1 when overlay support
> > is not used.
> [LY] How about assigning DP-BG to /dev/fb0, DC to /dev/fb1 and DP_FG
> to /dev/fb2?
> >
> >>     - It also looks that ipu_add_client_devices() and your framebuffer
> >> driver assume DP_BG/DP_FG are bound with DI0 and DC is bound with DI1.
> >>       It is ok for babbage board to support this kind of
> >> configuration, but it may bring some limitation. For example, TVE(TV
> >> encoder) module embedded in MX51 SoC can only connected with DI1 and
> >> users may like to use TV as the primary device(support HW overlay),
> >> and FSL Android BSP does support to use DI1 with LCD as the primary
> >> device on babbage board.
> >
> > SO we need to put the display number into the platform data, right?
> [LY] Yes, I think so. As the primary display port could be DI0 or DI1
> on boards like babbage board(two display ports are used), the primary
> display number in platform data should be configurable(I'm not sure
> whether this can be accepted by community), perhaps, configured by
> kernel bootup command line.

Ok, I'll find a solution for this.

> >
> >>
> >> 2) ipu-cpmem.c
> >>     - In order to improve performance, maybe writing
> >> ipu_ch_param_addr(ch) directly will be fine, but not using memset()
> >> and memcpy() in ipu_ch_param_init().
> >
> > I don't see this function in any performance critical path.
> [LY] Yes, currently, this function is not in performance critical
> path, so it is ok for me now. However, after IC/IRT channels are
> involved, the channels' idmac configuration might be changed from time
> to time and frequently, as the channels could be used as dma engine.

We are talking about 60 frames per second at maximum, right? So the
channel would be reconfigured 60 times a second, that's still not
performance critical, at least not if we are talking about a 100 byte or
something memset.

> >
> >>
> >> 3) ipu-dc.c
> >>     - Looks '#include <asm/atomic.h>' and '#include
> >> <linux/spinlock.h>' are unnecessary.
> >>     - Need to call 'ipu_module_disable(IPU_CONF_DC_EN);' somewhere.
> >
> > ok.
> >
> >>
> >> 4) ipu-di.c
> >>     - Looks '#include <asm/atomic.h>' and '#include <linux/delay.h>'
> >> are unnecessary.
> >
> > ok.
> >
> >>
> >> 5) ipu-dmfc.c
> >>     - Looks '#include <linux/delay.h>' are unnecessary.
> >
> > ok.
> >
> >>
> >> 6) ipu-dp.c
> >>     - Looks '#include <asm/atomic.h>' and '#include <linux/delay.h>'
> >> are unnecessary.
> >
> > ok.
> >
> >>
> >> 7) ipu-prv.h
> >>     - Looks '#include <linux/interrupt.h>' is unnecessary.
> >>     - Please rename 'MX51_IPU_CHANNEL_xxxx' to be 'IPU_CHANNEL_xxxx',
> >> IPUv3 channel names do not depend on SoC name.
> >
> > I was proven wrong each time I believed this.
> [LY] What if IPUv3 will be embedded in more SoCs? Could you please
> tell the reason? Thanks.

Then channel assignments will change, I'll promise.

Sascha


-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: s.hauer@pengutronix.de (Sascha Hauer)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 3/9] Add a mfd IPUv3 driver
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 09:40:24 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101214084024.GS6017@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimuchaGAEuGX24GSnAu5-FVtG_kE_KDozGKo9e-@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 12:05:07PM +0800, Liu Ying wrote:
> Hello, Sascha,
> 
> Please find my feedback with [LY] embedded.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Liu Ying
> 
> 2010/12/13 Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>:
> > Hi Liu Ying,
> >
> > Thanks for looking at the patches.
> [LY] You are welcome.
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 01:21:57PM +0800, Liu Ying wrote:
> >> Hello, Sascha,
> >>
> >> IPU is not embedded in i,MX50 SoC, but in i.MX51/53 SoCs, please
> >> modify the commit message.
> >>
> >> I have the following comments for the files editted respectively:
> >> 1) ipu-common.c
> >> ? ? - ipu_idmac_get()/ipu_idmac_put() need a mechanism to protect IPU
> >> IDMAC resources, namely, get rid of potential race condition issue. As
> >> only framebuffer support is added in your patches, there should be no
> >> race condition issue now. After IC channels are supported(maybe as DMA
> >> engine), perhaps, there will be such kind of issue.
> >
> > ok.
> >
> >> ? ? - ipu_idmac_select_buffer() need to add spinlock to protect
> >> IPU_CHA_BUFx_RDY registers.
> >
> > ok.
> >
> >> ? ? - It looks that ipu_uninit_channel() only clears
> >> IPU_CHA_DB_MODE_SEL register, so why not put it in
> >> ipu_idmac_disable_channel()?
> >
> > ok.
> >
> >> ? ? - It looks that ipu_add_client_devices() and your framebuffer
> >> patch assume /dev/fb0 uses DP_BG, /dev/fb1 uses DP_FG and /dev/fb2
> >> uses DC.
> >> ? ? ? But fb1_platform_data->ipu_channel_bg is
> >> MX51_IPU_CHANNEL_MEM_DC_SYNC, this may make confusion for driver
> >> readers and it is not easy for code maintenance.
> >
> > Do you have a better suggestion? fb2 becomes fb1 when overlay support
> > is not used.
> [LY] How about assigning DP-BG to /dev/fb0, DC to /dev/fb1 and DP_FG
> to /dev/fb2?
> >
> >> ? ? - It also looks that ipu_add_client_devices() and your framebuffer
> >> driver assume DP_BG/DP_FG are bound with DI0 and DC is bound with DI1.
> >> ? ? ? It is ok for babbage board to support this kind of
> >> configuration, but it may bring some limitation. For example, TVE(TV
> >> encoder) module embedded in MX51 SoC can only connected with DI1 and
> >> users may like to use TV as the primary device(support HW overlay),
> >> and FSL Android BSP does support to use DI1 with LCD as the primary
> >> device on babbage board.
> >
> > SO we need to put the display number into the platform data, right?
> [LY] Yes, I think so. As the primary display port could be DI0 or DI1
> on boards like babbage board(two display ports are used), the primary
> display number in platform data should be configurable(I'm not sure
> whether this can be accepted by community), perhaps, configured by
> kernel bootup command line.

Ok, I'll find a solution for this.

> >
> >>
> >> 2) ipu-cpmem.c
> >> ? ? - In order to improve performance, maybe writing
> >> ipu_ch_param_addr(ch) directly will be fine, but not using memset()
> >> and memcpy() in ipu_ch_param_init().
> >
> > I don't see this function in any performance critical path.
> [LY] Yes, currently, this function is not in performance critical
> path, so it is ok for me now. However, after IC/IRT channels are
> involved, the channels' idmac configuration might be changed from time
> to time and frequently, as the channels could be used as dma engine.

We are talking about 60 frames per second at maximum, right? So the
channel would be reconfigured 60 times a second, that's still not
performance critical, at least not if we are talking about a 100 byte or
something memset.

> >
> >>
> >> 3) ipu-dc.c
> >> ? ? - Looks '#include <asm/atomic.h>' and '#include
> >> <linux/spinlock.h>' are unnecessary.
> >> ? ? - Need to call 'ipu_module_disable(IPU_CONF_DC_EN);' somewhere.
> >
> > ok.
> >
> >>
> >> 4) ipu-di.c
> >> ? ? - Looks '#include <asm/atomic.h>' and '#include <linux/delay.h>'
> >> are unnecessary.
> >
> > ok.
> >
> >>
> >> 5) ipu-dmfc.c
> >> ? ? - Looks '#include <linux/delay.h>' are unnecessary.
> >
> > ok.
> >
> >>
> >> 6) ipu-dp.c
> >> ? ? - Looks '#include <asm/atomic.h>' and '#include <linux/delay.h>'
> >> are unnecessary.
> >
> > ok.
> >
> >>
> >> 7) ipu-prv.h
> >> ? ? - Looks '#include <linux/interrupt.h>' is unnecessary.
> >> ? ? - Please rename 'MX51_IPU_CHANNEL_xxxx' to be 'IPU_CHANNEL_xxxx',
> >> IPUv3 channel names do not depend on SoC name.
> >
> > I was proven wrong each time I believed this.
> [LY] What if IPUv3 will be embedded in more SoCs? Could you please
> tell the reason? Thanks.

Then channel assignments will change, I'll promise.

Sascha


-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |

  reply	other threads:[~2010-12-14  8:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 133+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-12-09 13:47 [PATCH RFC] i.MX51 Framebuffer support Sascha Hauer
2010-12-09 13:47 ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-09 13:47 ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-09 13:47 ` [PATCH 1/9] ARM i.MX51: Add ipu clock support Sascha Hauer
2010-12-09 13:47   ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-09 13:47   ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-15 15:40   ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-12-15 15:40     ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-12-15 15:40     ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-12-15 16:34     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-12-15 16:34       ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-12-15 16:34       ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-12-15 16:49       ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-12-15 16:49         ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-12-15 16:49         ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-12-15 17:12         ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-12-15 17:12           ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-12-15 17:12           ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-12-09 13:47 ` [PATCH 2/9] ARM i.MX51: rename IPU irqs Sascha Hauer
2010-12-09 13:47   ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-09 13:47   ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-09 14:34   ` Uwe Kleine-König
2010-12-09 14:34     ` Uwe Kleine-König
2010-12-09 14:34     ` 
2010-12-09 13:47 ` [PATCH 3/9] Add a mfd IPUv3 driver Sascha Hauer
2010-12-09 13:47   ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-12  5:21   ` Liu Ying
2010-12-12  5:21     ` Liu Ying
2010-12-13 11:23     ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-13 11:23       ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-13 11:23       ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-14  4:05       ` Liu Ying
2010-12-14  4:05         ` Liu Ying
2010-12-14  4:05         ` Liu Ying
2010-12-14  8:40         ` Sascha Hauer [this message]
2010-12-14  8:40           ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-14  8:40           ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-14 13:13           ` Liu Ying
2010-12-14 13:13             ` Liu Ying
2010-12-14 13:13             ` Liu Ying
2010-12-09 13:47 ` [PATCH 4/9] fb: export fb mode db table Sascha Hauer
2010-12-09 13:47   ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-09 13:47   ` Sascha Hauer
2011-01-06  7:26   ` Paul Mundt
2011-01-06  7:26     ` Paul Mundt
2011-01-06  7:26     ` Paul Mundt
2011-01-06 10:04     ` Sascha Hauer
2011-01-06 10:04       ` Sascha Hauer
2011-01-06 10:04       ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-09 13:47 ` [PATCH 5/9] Add i.MX5 framebuffer driver Sascha Hauer
2010-12-09 13:47   ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-09 13:47   ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-12  6:13   ` Liu Ying
2010-12-12  6:13     ` Liu Ying
2010-12-12  6:13     ` Liu Ying
2010-12-13  7:23     ` Lothar Waßmann
2010-12-13  7:23       ` Lothar Waßmann
2010-12-13  7:23       ` Lothar Waßmann
2010-12-13 11:35       ` Liu Ying
2010-12-13 11:35         ` Liu Ying
2010-12-13 11:35         ` Liu Ying
2010-12-13 11:38     ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-13 11:38       ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-13 11:38       ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-14  6:40       ` Liu Ying
2010-12-14  6:40         ` Liu Ying
2010-12-14  6:40         ` Liu Ying
2010-12-14  8:45         ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-14  8:45           ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-14  8:45           ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-14 13:23           ` Liu Ying
2010-12-14 13:23             ` Liu Ying
2010-12-14 13:23             ` Liu Ying
2010-12-15 11:17             ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-15 11:17               ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-15 11:17               ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-09 13:47 ` [PATCH 6/9] ARM i.MX51: Add IPU device support Sascha Hauer
2010-12-09 13:47   ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-09 13:47   ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-15 15:49   ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-12-15 15:49     ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-12-15 15:49     ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-12-15 16:26     ` Arnaud Patard
2010-12-15 16:26       ` Arnaud Patard (Rtp)
2010-12-15 16:26       ` Arnaud Patard
2010-12-15 16:29       ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-12-15 16:29         ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-12-15 16:29         ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-12-09 13:47 ` [PATCH 7/9] ARM i.MX5: Allow to increase max zone order Sascha Hauer
2010-12-09 13:47   ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-09 13:47   ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-09 13:47 ` [PATCH 8/9] ARM i.MX5: increase dma consistent size for IPU support Sascha Hauer
2010-12-09 13:47   ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-09 13:47   ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-09 13:47 ` [PATCH 9/9] ARM i.MX51 babbage: Add framebuffer support Sascha Hauer
2010-12-09 13:47   ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-09 13:47   ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-12  1:37   ` Liu Ying
2010-12-12  1:37     ` Liu Ying
2010-12-12  1:37     ` Liu Ying
2010-12-13 11:43     ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-13 11:43       ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-13 11:43       ` Sascha Hauer
2010-12-14  6:47       ` Liu Ying
2010-12-14  6:47         ` Liu Ying
2010-12-14  6:47         ` Liu Ying
2010-12-15  9:35 ` [PATCH RFC] i.MX51 Framebuffer support Peter Horton
2010-12-15 11:24   ` Sascha Hauer
     [not found] <33F32152BE7EC740BC2C838D2836AC8704A4FD@039-SN1MPN1-002.039d.mgd.msft.net>
2010-12-14 12:02 ` [PATCH 3/9] Add a mfd IPUv3 driver Chen Jie-B02280
2010-12-20 10:48 [PATCH v2] i.MX51 Framebuffer support Sascha Hauer
2010-12-20 10:48 ` [PATCH 3/9] Add a mfd IPUv3 driver Sascha Hauer
2010-12-20 10:48   ` Sascha Hauer
2011-01-03 15:42   ` Sascha Hauer
2011-01-03 15:42     ` Sascha Hauer
2011-01-07 12:08     ` Samuel Ortiz
2011-01-07 12:08       ` Samuel Ortiz
2011-01-31  8:20       ` Sascha Hauer
2011-01-31  8:20         ` Sascha Hauer
2011-02-01 10:51   ` Samuel Ortiz
2011-02-01 10:51     ` Samuel Ortiz
2011-02-01 10:59     ` Sascha Hauer
2011-02-01 10:59       ` Sascha Hauer
2011-02-01 11:44       ` Samuel Ortiz
2011-02-01 11:44         ` Samuel Ortiz
2011-02-01 11:51         ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-02-01 11:51           ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-02-01 12:07           ` Arnaud Patard
2011-02-01 12:07             ` Arnaud Patard (Rtp)
2011-02-01 12:51             ` Sascha Hauer
2011-02-01 12:51               ` Sascha Hauer
2011-02-01 16:47               ` Uwe Kleine-König
2011-02-01 16:47                 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2011-02-01 14:03           ` Samuel Ortiz
2011-02-01 14:03             ` Samuel Ortiz

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=20101214084024.GS6017@pengutronix.de \
    --to=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=arnaud.patard@rtp-net.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=liu.y.victor@gmail.com \
    --cc=r58066@freescale.com \
    /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.