All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Guenter Roeck <linux-0h96xk9xTtrk1uMJSBkQmQ@public.gmane.org>
To: Wei Ni <wni-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Cc: khali-PUYAD+kWke1g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org,
	swarren-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org,
	MLongnecker-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org,
	lm-sensors-GZX6beZjE8VD60Wz+7aTrA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] hwmon: (lm90) Add power control
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2013 00:03:20 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5201F138.3080906@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1375858358-15070-2-git-send-email-wni-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>

On 08/06/2013 11:52 PM, Wei Ni wrote:
> The device lm90 can be controlled by the vdd rail.
> Adding the power control support to power on/off the vdd rail.
> And make sure that power is enabled before accessing the device.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wei Ni <wni-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
> ---
>   drivers/hwmon/lm90.c |   52 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>   1 file changed, 52 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c b/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c
> index cdff742..eeb0115 100644
> --- a/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c
> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c
> @@ -89,6 +89,8 @@
>   #include <linux/err.h>
>   #include <linux/mutex.h>
>   #include <linux/sysfs.h>
> +#include <linux/delay.h>
> +#include <linux/regulator/consumer.h>
>
>   /*
>    * Addresses to scan
> @@ -179,6 +181,8 @@ enum chips { lm90, adm1032, lm99, lm86, max6657, max6659, adt7461, max6680,
>   #define LM90_HAVE_TEMP3		(1 << 6) /* 3rd temperature sensor	*/
>   #define LM90_HAVE_BROKEN_ALERT	(1 << 7) /* Broken alert		*/
>
> +#define POWER_ON_DELAY 20 /*ms*/
> +
>   /*
>    * Driver data (common to all clients)
>    */
> @@ -302,6 +306,7 @@ static const struct lm90_params lm90_params[] = {
>   struct lm90_data {
>   	struct device *hwmon_dev;
>   	struct mutex update_lock;
> +	struct regulator *lm90_reg;
>   	char valid; /* zero until following fields are valid */
>   	unsigned long last_updated; /* in jiffies */
>   	int kind;
> @@ -1391,6 +1396,48 @@ static void lm90_init_client(struct i2c_client *client)
>   		i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(client, LM90_REG_W_CONFIG1, config);
>   }
>
> +static int lm90_power_control(struct i2c_client *client, bool is_enable)
> +{
> +	struct lm90_data *data = i2c_get_clientdata(client);
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&data->update_lock);
> +
> +	if (!data->lm90_reg) {
> +		data->lm90_reg = regulator_get(&client->dev, "vdd");
> +		if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(data->lm90_reg)) {
> +			if (PTR_ERR(data->lm90_reg) == -ENODEV)
> +				dev_info(&client->dev,
> +					 "No regulator found for vdd. Assuming vdd is always powered.");
> +			else
> +				dev_warn(&client->dev,
> +					 "Error [%ld] in getting the regulator handle for vdd.\n",
> +					 PTR_ERR(data->lm90_reg));
> +			data->lm90_reg = NULL;
> +			mutex_unlock(&data->update_lock);
> +			return -ENODEV;

I don't think it is acceptable to have the driver fail on pretty much all PCs.

Also, I dislike that - even if the calling code doesn't fail - the above message would be displayed on unload as well.

In general, the 'unload' flag seems unnecessary. You could just call

	if (data->lm90_reg)
		regulator_disable();

in the remove function. In addition to that, shouldn't you call regulator_put() on exit ?
Also, I am missing error handling in the probe function; if something else fails,
the regulator is neither disabled nor released.

Guenter

> +		}
> +	}
> +	if (is_enable) {
> +		ret = regulator_enable(data->lm90_reg);
> +		msleep(POWER_ON_DELAY);
> +	} else {
> +		ret = regulator_disable(data->lm90_reg);
> +	}
> +
> +	if (ret < 0)
> +		dev_err(&client->dev,
> +			"Error in %s rail vdd, error %d\n",
> +			(is_enable) ? "enabling" : "disabling", ret);
> +	else
> +		dev_info(&client->dev, "success in %s rail vdd\n",
> +			 (is_enable) ? "enabling" : "disabling");
> +
> +	mutex_unlock(&data->update_lock);
> +
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +
>   static int lm90_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
>   		      const struct i2c_device_id *id)
>   {
> @@ -1406,6 +1453,10 @@ static int lm90_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
>   	i2c_set_clientdata(client, data);
>   	mutex_init(&data->update_lock);
>
> +	err = lm90_power_control(client, true);
> +	if (err < 0)
> +		return err;
> +
>   	/* Set the device type */
>   	data->kind = id->driver_data;
>   	if (data->kind == adm1032) {
> @@ -1483,6 +1534,7 @@ static int lm90_remove(struct i2c_client *client)
>   	hwmon_device_unregister(data->hwmon_dev);
>   	lm90_remove_files(client, data);
>   	lm90_restore_conf(client, data);
> +	lm90_power_control(client, false);
>
>   	return 0;
>   }
>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Wei Ni <wni@nvidia.com>
Cc: khali@linux-fr.org, swarren@wwwdotorg.org,
	MLongnecker@nvidia.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] hwmon: (lm90) Add power control
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2013 00:03:20 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5201F138.3080906@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1375858358-15070-2-git-send-email-wni@nvidia.com>

On 08/06/2013 11:52 PM, Wei Ni wrote:
> The device lm90 can be controlled by the vdd rail.
> Adding the power control support to power on/off the vdd rail.
> And make sure that power is enabled before accessing the device.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wei Ni <wni@nvidia.com>
> ---
>   drivers/hwmon/lm90.c |   52 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>   1 file changed, 52 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c b/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c
> index cdff742..eeb0115 100644
> --- a/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c
> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c
> @@ -89,6 +89,8 @@
>   #include <linux/err.h>
>   #include <linux/mutex.h>
>   #include <linux/sysfs.h>
> +#include <linux/delay.h>
> +#include <linux/regulator/consumer.h>
>
>   /*
>    * Addresses to scan
> @@ -179,6 +181,8 @@ enum chips { lm90, adm1032, lm99, lm86, max6657, max6659, adt7461, max6680,
>   #define LM90_HAVE_TEMP3		(1 << 6) /* 3rd temperature sensor	*/
>   #define LM90_HAVE_BROKEN_ALERT	(1 << 7) /* Broken alert		*/
>
> +#define POWER_ON_DELAY 20 /*ms*/
> +
>   /*
>    * Driver data (common to all clients)
>    */
> @@ -302,6 +306,7 @@ static const struct lm90_params lm90_params[] = {
>   struct lm90_data {
>   	struct device *hwmon_dev;
>   	struct mutex update_lock;
> +	struct regulator *lm90_reg;
>   	char valid; /* zero until following fields are valid */
>   	unsigned long last_updated; /* in jiffies */
>   	int kind;
> @@ -1391,6 +1396,48 @@ static void lm90_init_client(struct i2c_client *client)
>   		i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(client, LM90_REG_W_CONFIG1, config);
>   }
>
> +static int lm90_power_control(struct i2c_client *client, bool is_enable)
> +{
> +	struct lm90_data *data = i2c_get_clientdata(client);
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&data->update_lock);
> +
> +	if (!data->lm90_reg) {
> +		data->lm90_reg = regulator_get(&client->dev, "vdd");
> +		if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(data->lm90_reg)) {
> +			if (PTR_ERR(data->lm90_reg) == -ENODEV)
> +				dev_info(&client->dev,
> +					 "No regulator found for vdd. Assuming vdd is always powered.");
> +			else
> +				dev_warn(&client->dev,
> +					 "Error [%ld] in getting the regulator handle for vdd.\n",
> +					 PTR_ERR(data->lm90_reg));
> +			data->lm90_reg = NULL;
> +			mutex_unlock(&data->update_lock);
> +			return -ENODEV;

I don't think it is acceptable to have the driver fail on pretty much all PCs.

Also, I dislike that - even if the calling code doesn't fail - the above message would be displayed on unload as well.

In general, the 'unload' flag seems unnecessary. You could just call

	if (data->lm90_reg)
		regulator_disable();

in the remove function. In addition to that, shouldn't you call regulator_put() on exit ?
Also, I am missing error handling in the probe function; if something else fails,
the regulator is neither disabled nor released.

Guenter

> +		}
> +	}
> +	if (is_enable) {
> +		ret = regulator_enable(data->lm90_reg);
> +		msleep(POWER_ON_DELAY);
> +	} else {
> +		ret = regulator_disable(data->lm90_reg);
> +	}
> +
> +	if (ret < 0)
> +		dev_err(&client->dev,
> +			"Error in %s rail vdd, error %d\n",
> +			(is_enable) ? "enabling" : "disabling", ret);
> +	else
> +		dev_info(&client->dev, "success in %s rail vdd\n",
> +			 (is_enable) ? "enabling" : "disabling");
> +
> +	mutex_unlock(&data->update_lock);
> +
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +
>   static int lm90_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
>   		      const struct i2c_device_id *id)
>   {
> @@ -1406,6 +1453,10 @@ static int lm90_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
>   	i2c_set_clientdata(client, data);
>   	mutex_init(&data->update_lock);
>
> +	err = lm90_power_control(client, true);
> +	if (err < 0)
> +		return err;
> +
>   	/* Set the device type */
>   	data->kind = id->driver_data;
>   	if (data->kind == adm1032) {
> @@ -1483,6 +1534,7 @@ static int lm90_remove(struct i2c_client *client)
>   	hwmon_device_unregister(data->hwmon_dev);
>   	lm90_remove_files(client, data);
>   	lm90_restore_conf(client, data);
> +	lm90_power_control(client, false);
>
>   	return 0;
>   }
>


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: linux@roeck-us.net (Guenter Roeck)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] hwmon: (lm90) Add power control
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2013 00:03:20 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5201F138.3080906@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1375858358-15070-2-git-send-email-wni@nvidia.com>

On 08/06/2013 11:52 PM, Wei Ni wrote:
> The device lm90 can be controlled by the vdd rail.
> Adding the power control support to power on/off the vdd rail.
> And make sure that power is enabled before accessing the device.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wei Ni <wni@nvidia.com>
> ---
>   drivers/hwmon/lm90.c |   52 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>   1 file changed, 52 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c b/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c
> index cdff742..eeb0115 100644
> --- a/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c
> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c
> @@ -89,6 +89,8 @@
>   #include <linux/err.h>
>   #include <linux/mutex.h>
>   #include <linux/sysfs.h>
> +#include <linux/delay.h>
> +#include <linux/regulator/consumer.h>
>
>   /*
>    * Addresses to scan
> @@ -179,6 +181,8 @@ enum chips { lm90, adm1032, lm99, lm86, max6657, max6659, adt7461, max6680,
>   #define LM90_HAVE_TEMP3		(1 << 6) /* 3rd temperature sensor	*/
>   #define LM90_HAVE_BROKEN_ALERT	(1 << 7) /* Broken alert		*/
>
> +#define POWER_ON_DELAY 20 /*ms*/
> +
>   /*
>    * Driver data (common to all clients)
>    */
> @@ -302,6 +306,7 @@ static const struct lm90_params lm90_params[] = {
>   struct lm90_data {
>   	struct device *hwmon_dev;
>   	struct mutex update_lock;
> +	struct regulator *lm90_reg;
>   	char valid; /* zero until following fields are valid */
>   	unsigned long last_updated; /* in jiffies */
>   	int kind;
> @@ -1391,6 +1396,48 @@ static void lm90_init_client(struct i2c_client *client)
>   		i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(client, LM90_REG_W_CONFIG1, config);
>   }
>
> +static int lm90_power_control(struct i2c_client *client, bool is_enable)
> +{
> +	struct lm90_data *data = i2c_get_clientdata(client);
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&data->update_lock);
> +
> +	if (!data->lm90_reg) {
> +		data->lm90_reg = regulator_get(&client->dev, "vdd");
> +		if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(data->lm90_reg)) {
> +			if (PTR_ERR(data->lm90_reg) == -ENODEV)
> +				dev_info(&client->dev,
> +					 "No regulator found for vdd. Assuming vdd is always powered.");
> +			else
> +				dev_warn(&client->dev,
> +					 "Error [%ld] in getting the regulator handle for vdd.\n",
> +					 PTR_ERR(data->lm90_reg));
> +			data->lm90_reg = NULL;
> +			mutex_unlock(&data->update_lock);
> +			return -ENODEV;

I don't think it is acceptable to have the driver fail on pretty much all PCs.

Also, I dislike that - even if the calling code doesn't fail - the above message would be displayed on unload as well.

In general, the 'unload' flag seems unnecessary. You could just call

	if (data->lm90_reg)
		regulator_disable();

in the remove function. In addition to that, shouldn't you call regulator_put() on exit ?
Also, I am missing error handling in the probe function; if something else fails,
the regulator is neither disabled nor released.

Guenter

> +		}
> +	}
> +	if (is_enable) {
> +		ret = regulator_enable(data->lm90_reg);
> +		msleep(POWER_ON_DELAY);
> +	} else {
> +		ret = regulator_disable(data->lm90_reg);
> +	}
> +
> +	if (ret < 0)
> +		dev_err(&client->dev,
> +			"Error in %s rail vdd, error %d\n",
> +			(is_enable) ? "enabling" : "disabling", ret);
> +	else
> +		dev_info(&client->dev, "success in %s rail vdd\n",
> +			 (is_enable) ? "enabling" : "disabling");
> +
> +	mutex_unlock(&data->update_lock);
> +
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +
>   static int lm90_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
>   		      const struct i2c_device_id *id)
>   {
> @@ -1406,6 +1453,10 @@ static int lm90_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
>   	i2c_set_clientdata(client, data);
>   	mutex_init(&data->update_lock);
>
> +	err = lm90_power_control(client, true);
> +	if (err < 0)
> +		return err;
> +
>   	/* Set the device type */
>   	data->kind = id->driver_data;
>   	if (data->kind == adm1032) {
> @@ -1483,6 +1534,7 @@ static int lm90_remove(struct i2c_client *client)
>   	hwmon_device_unregister(data->hwmon_dev);
>   	lm90_remove_files(client, data);
>   	lm90_restore_conf(client, data);
> +	lm90_power_control(client, false);
>
>   	return 0;
>   }
>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Wei Ni <wni-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Cc: khali-PUYAD+kWke1g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org,
	swarren-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org,
	MLongnecker-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org,
	lm-sensors-GZX6beZjE8VD60Wz+7aTrA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] [PATCH 1/2] hwmon: (lm90) Add power control
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2013 07:03:20 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5201F138.3080906@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1375858358-15070-2-git-send-email-wni-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>

On 08/06/2013 11:52 PM, Wei Ni wrote:
> The device lm90 can be controlled by the vdd rail.
> Adding the power control support to power on/off the vdd rail.
> And make sure that power is enabled before accessing the device.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wei Ni <wni@nvidia.com>
> ---
>   drivers/hwmon/lm90.c |   52 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>   1 file changed, 52 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c b/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c
> index cdff742..eeb0115 100644
> --- a/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c
> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c
> @@ -89,6 +89,8 @@
>   #include <linux/err.h>
>   #include <linux/mutex.h>
>   #include <linux/sysfs.h>
> +#include <linux/delay.h>
> +#include <linux/regulator/consumer.h>
>
>   /*
>    * Addresses to scan
> @@ -179,6 +181,8 @@ enum chips { lm90, adm1032, lm99, lm86, max6657, max6659, adt7461, max6680,
>   #define LM90_HAVE_TEMP3		(1 << 6) /* 3rd temperature sensor	*/
>   #define LM90_HAVE_BROKEN_ALERT	(1 << 7) /* Broken alert		*/
>
> +#define POWER_ON_DELAY 20 /*ms*/
> +
>   /*
>    * Driver data (common to all clients)
>    */
> @@ -302,6 +306,7 @@ static const struct lm90_params lm90_params[] = {
>   struct lm90_data {
>   	struct device *hwmon_dev;
>   	struct mutex update_lock;
> +	struct regulator *lm90_reg;
>   	char valid; /* zero until following fields are valid */
>   	unsigned long last_updated; /* in jiffies */
>   	int kind;
> @@ -1391,6 +1396,48 @@ static void lm90_init_client(struct i2c_client *client)
>   		i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(client, LM90_REG_W_CONFIG1, config);
>   }
>
> +static int lm90_power_control(struct i2c_client *client, bool is_enable)
> +{
> +	struct lm90_data *data = i2c_get_clientdata(client);
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&data->update_lock);
> +
> +	if (!data->lm90_reg) {
> +		data->lm90_reg = regulator_get(&client->dev, "vdd");
> +		if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(data->lm90_reg)) {
> +			if (PTR_ERR(data->lm90_reg) = -ENODEV)
> +				dev_info(&client->dev,
> +					 "No regulator found for vdd. Assuming vdd is always powered.");
> +			else
> +				dev_warn(&client->dev,
> +					 "Error [%ld] in getting the regulator handle for vdd.\n",
> +					 PTR_ERR(data->lm90_reg));
> +			data->lm90_reg = NULL;
> +			mutex_unlock(&data->update_lock);
> +			return -ENODEV;

I don't think it is acceptable to have the driver fail on pretty much all PCs.

Also, I dislike that - even if the calling code doesn't fail - the above message would be displayed on unload as well.

In general, the 'unload' flag seems unnecessary. You could just call

	if (data->lm90_reg)
		regulator_disable();

in the remove function. In addition to that, shouldn't you call regulator_put() on exit ?
Also, I am missing error handling in the probe function; if something else fails,
the regulator is neither disabled nor released.

Guenter

> +		}
> +	}
> +	if (is_enable) {
> +		ret = regulator_enable(data->lm90_reg);
> +		msleep(POWER_ON_DELAY);
> +	} else {
> +		ret = regulator_disable(data->lm90_reg);
> +	}
> +
> +	if (ret < 0)
> +		dev_err(&client->dev,
> +			"Error in %s rail vdd, error %d\n",
> +			(is_enable) ? "enabling" : "disabling", ret);
> +	else
> +		dev_info(&client->dev, "success in %s rail vdd\n",
> +			 (is_enable) ? "enabling" : "disabling");
> +
> +	mutex_unlock(&data->update_lock);
> +
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +
>   static int lm90_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
>   		      const struct i2c_device_id *id)
>   {
> @@ -1406,6 +1453,10 @@ static int lm90_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
>   	i2c_set_clientdata(client, data);
>   	mutex_init(&data->update_lock);
>
> +	err = lm90_power_control(client, true);
> +	if (err < 0)
> +		return err;
> +
>   	/* Set the device type */
>   	data->kind = id->driver_data;
>   	if (data->kind = adm1032) {
> @@ -1483,6 +1534,7 @@ static int lm90_remove(struct i2c_client *client)
>   	hwmon_device_unregister(data->hwmon_dev);
>   	lm90_remove_files(client, data);
>   	lm90_restore_conf(client, data);
> +	lm90_power_control(client, false);
>
>   	return 0;
>   }
>


_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors

  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-08-07  7:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 63+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-08-07  6:52 [PATCH 0/2] Add power control for lm90 Wei Ni
2013-08-07  6:52 ` [lm-sensors] " Wei Ni
2013-08-07  6:52 ` Wei Ni
2013-08-07  6:52 ` Wei Ni
2013-08-07  6:52 ` [PATCH 1/2] hwmon: (lm90) Add power control Wei Ni
2013-08-07  6:52   ` [lm-sensors] " Wei Ni
2013-08-07  6:52   ` Wei Ni
2013-08-07  6:52   ` Wei Ni
     [not found]   ` <1375858358-15070-2-git-send-email-wni-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2013-08-07  7:03     ` Guenter Roeck [this message]
2013-08-07  7:03       ` [lm-sensors] " Guenter Roeck
2013-08-07  7:03       ` Guenter Roeck
2013-08-07  7:03       ` Guenter Roeck
     [not found]       ` <5201F138.3080906-0h96xk9xTtrk1uMJSBkQmQ@public.gmane.org>
2013-08-07  7:15         ` Wei Ni
2013-08-07  7:15           ` [lm-sensors] " Wei Ni
2013-08-07  7:15           ` Wei Ni
2013-08-07  7:15           ` Wei Ni
2013-08-07  7:27   ` Alexander Shiyan
2013-08-07  7:27     ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH 1/2] hwmon: (lm90) Add po Alexander Shiyan
2013-08-07  7:27     ` [PATCH 1/2] hwmon: (lm90) Add power control Alexander Shiyan
2013-08-07  7:27     ` Alexander Shiyan
     [not found]     ` <1375860442.896960598-syZRKAW8O9ZsdVUOrk1QfQ@public.gmane.org>
2013-08-07  7:32       ` Wei Ni
2013-08-07  7:32         ` [lm-sensors] " Wei Ni
2013-08-07  7:32         ` Wei Ni
2013-08-07  7:32         ` Wei Ni
     [not found]         ` <5201F811.9050602-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2013-08-07  7:50           ` Guenter Roeck
2013-08-07  7:50             ` [lm-sensors] " Guenter Roeck
2013-08-07  7:50             ` Guenter Roeck
2013-08-07  7:50             ` Guenter Roeck
2013-08-07  8:07             ` Wei Ni
2013-08-07  8:07               ` [lm-sensors] " Wei Ni
2013-08-07  8:07               ` Wei Ni
2013-08-07  8:07               ` Wei Ni
     [not found]               ` <52020047.1080705-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2013-08-07  8:45                 ` Alexander Shiyan
2013-08-07  8:45                   ` [lm-sensors] [PATCH 1/2] hwmon: (lm90) Add po Alexander Shiyan
2013-08-07  8:45                   ` [PATCH 1/2] hwmon: (lm90) Add power control Alexander Shiyan
2013-08-07  8:45                   ` Alexander Shiyan
     [not found]                   ` <1375865105.562600640-y1D/hCXJdYBsdVUOrk1QfQ@public.gmane.org>
2013-08-07  9:35                     ` Wei Ni
2013-08-07  9:35                       ` [lm-sensors] " Wei Ni
2013-08-07  9:35                       ` Wei Ni
2013-08-07  9:35                       ` Wei Ni
     [not found]                       ` <520214C9.1010200-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2013-08-07 16:06                         ` Stephen Warren
2013-08-07 16:06                           ` [lm-sensors] " Stephen Warren
2013-08-07 16:06                           ` Stephen Warren
2013-08-07 16:06                           ` Stephen Warren
     [not found]                           ` <52027086.1090608-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org>
2013-08-07 16:44                             ` Guenter Roeck
2013-08-07 16:44                               ` [lm-sensors] " Guenter Roeck
2013-08-07 16:44                               ` Guenter Roeck
2013-08-07 16:44                               ` Guenter Roeck
2013-08-07  7:45     ` Guenter Roeck
2013-08-07  7:45       ` [lm-sensors] " Guenter Roeck
2013-08-07  7:45       ` Guenter Roeck
2013-08-07  6:52 ` [PATCH 2/2] ARM: dt: t114 dalmore: add dt entry for nct1008 Wei Ni
2013-08-07  6:52   ` [lm-sensors] " Wei Ni
2013-08-07  6:52   ` Wei Ni
2013-08-07  6:52   ` Wei Ni
     [not found]   ` <1375858358-15070-3-git-send-email-wni-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2013-08-07 16:03     ` Stephen Warren
2013-08-07 16:03       ` [lm-sensors] " Stephen Warren
2013-08-07 16:03       ` Stephen Warren
2013-08-07 16:03       ` Stephen Warren
     [not found]       ` <52026FEE.9070003-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org>
2013-08-08  2:36         ` Wei Ni
2013-08-08  2:36           ` [lm-sensors] " Wei Ni
2013-08-08  2:36           ` Wei Ni
2013-08-08  2:36           ` Wei Ni

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=5201F138.3080906@roeck-us.net \
    --to=linux-0h96xk9xttrk1umjsbkqmq@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=MLongnecker-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=khali-PUYAD+kWke1g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=lm-sensors-GZX6beZjE8VD60Wz+7aTrA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=swarren-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=wni-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.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.