From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 10/10] ARM: OMAP2+: tusb6010: generic timing calculation Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 16:10:02 -0700 Message-ID: <20120917231001.GK11762@atomide.com> References: <20120824194630.GU11011@atomide.com> <20120906204354.GJ1303@atomide.com> <20120911184606.GN23092@atomide.com> <20120917225023.GJ11762@atomide.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mho-04-ewr.mailhop.org ([204.13.248.74]:12388 "EHLO mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754975Ab2IQXKG (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Sep 2012 19:10:06 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120917225023.GJ11762@atomide.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: "Mohammed, Afzal" Cc: "paul@pwsan.com" , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "Hunter, Jon" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" * Tony Lindgren [120917 15:54]: > * Mohammed, Afzal [120917 01:40]: > > Hi Tony, > > > > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 15:50:02, Mohammed, Afzal wrote: > > > * Mohammed, Afzal: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 3:20 PM > > > > > > But some of the tusb async values is less by one. I need > > > > to get it right. > > > > > > Reason has been identified. It was due to rounding error, > > > no changes are required in the expressions. Moving > > > completely to picoseconds resolves the issue. > > > > > > Can you please try with the attached patch ? > > Gave it a quick try and it seemed to work.. But when I tried > rebasing my patches for the cbus to keep things working with > the watchdog, I ran into multiple merge conflicts with > current linux next and gave up. OK went back to my original branch without current linux next and with the new cbus + retu driver from Aaro applied. Confirmed it's now working on n800 tusb6010. > Care to repost this series updated against current linux > next? > > I'm afraid I've pretty much lost track of all the patches > and rather not start resolving the conflicts as I'm sure > I'll break something else :) You should still repost the whole updated series against linux next. Regards, Tony From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: tony@atomide.com (Tony Lindgren) Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 16:10:02 -0700 Subject: [PATCH v6 10/10] ARM: OMAP2+: tusb6010: generic timing calculation In-Reply-To: <20120917225023.GJ11762@atomide.com> References: <20120824194630.GU11011@atomide.com> <20120906204354.GJ1303@atomide.com> <20120911184606.GN23092@atomide.com> <20120917225023.GJ11762@atomide.com> Message-ID: <20120917231001.GK11762@atomide.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org * Tony Lindgren [120917 15:54]: > * Mohammed, Afzal [120917 01:40]: > > Hi Tony, > > > > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 15:50:02, Mohammed, Afzal wrote: > > > * Mohammed, Afzal: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 3:20 PM > > > > > > But some of the tusb async values is less by one. I need > > > > to get it right. > > > > > > Reason has been identified. It was due to rounding error, > > > no changes are required in the expressions. Moving > > > completely to picoseconds resolves the issue. > > > > > > Can you please try with the attached patch ? > > Gave it a quick try and it seemed to work.. But when I tried > rebasing my patches for the cbus to keep things working with > the watchdog, I ran into multiple merge conflicts with > current linux next and gave up. OK went back to my original branch without current linux next and with the new cbus + retu driver from Aaro applied. Confirmed it's now working on n800 tusb6010. > Care to repost this series updated against current linux > next? > > I'm afraid I've pretty much lost track of all the patches > and rather not start resolving the conflicts as I'm sure > I'll break something else :) You should still repost the whole updated series against linux next. Regards, Tony