All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@gmail.com>
To: Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@nxp.com>,
	Timur Tabi <timur@kernel.org>,
	Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@gmail.com>,
	Xiubo Li <Xiubo.Lee@gmail.com>,
	Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	perex@perex.cz, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.com>,
	shawnguo@kernel.org, s.hauer@pengutronix.de,
	kernel@pengutronix.de, linux-imx@nxp.com,
	sumit.semwal@linaro.org, Linux-ALSA <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-media@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl: imx-pcm-dma: Don't request dma channel in probe
Date: Wed, 20 May 2020 19:22:19 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAA+D8APAMRwtVneqFsuBgAhozmQo3R0AQi0bVdUCQO4Af4xVfw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53258cd99caaf1199036737f8fad6cc097939567.camel@pengutronix.de>

Hi

On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 5:42 PM Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de> wrote:
>
> Am Mittwoch, den 20.05.2020, 16:20 +0800 schrieb Shengjiu Wang:
> > Hi
> >
> > On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 6:04 PM Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de> wrote:
> > > Am Dienstag, den 19.05.2020, 17:41 +0800 schrieb Shengjiu Wang:
> > > > There are two requirements that we need to move the request
> > > > of dma channel from probe to open.
> > >
> > > How do you handle -EPROBE_DEFER return code from the channel request if
> > > you don't do it in probe?
> >
> > I use the dma_request_slave_channel or dma_request_channel instead
> > of dmaengine_pcm_request_chan_of. so there should be not -EPROBE_DEFER
> > return code.
>
> This is a pretty weak argument. The dmaengine device might probe after
> you try to get the channel. Using a function to request the channel
> that doesn't allow you to handle probe deferral is IMHO a bug and
> should be fixed, instead of building even more assumptions on top of
> it.
>

I see some driver also request dma channel in open() or hw_params().
how can they avoid the defer probe issue?
for example:
sound/arm/pxa2xx-pcm-lib.c
sound/soc/sprd/sprd-pcm-dma.c

> > > > - When dma device binds with power-domains, the power will
> > > > be enabled when we request dma channel. If the request of dma
> > > > channel happen on probe, then the power-domains will be always
> > > > enabled after kernel boot up,  which is not good for power
> > > > saving,  so we need to move the request of dma channel to .open();
> > >
> > > This is certainly something which could be fixed in the dmaengine
> > > driver.
> >
> > Dma driver always call the pm_runtime_get_sync in
> > device_alloc_chan_resources, the device_alloc_chan_resources is
> > called when channel is requested. so power is enabled on channel
> > request.
>
> So why can't you fix the dmaengine driver to do that RPM call at a
> later time when the channel is actually going to be used? This will
> allow further power savings with other slave devices than the audio
> PCM.
>
> Regards,
> Lucas
>

It seems the best place for calling pm_runtime_get_sync is the
device_alloc_chan_resources, and calling pm_runtime_put_sync
in the .device_free_chan_resources

For the slave_sg mode, the .device_prep_slave_sg and
.device_issue_pending  will be called many times after
.device_alloc_chan_resources. so it is not good to call
pm_runtime_get_sync in .device_prep_slave_sg or
.device_issue_pending

best regards
wang shengjiu

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@gmail.com>
To: Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>
Cc: sumit.semwal@linaro.org, linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org,
	Linux-ALSA <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Timur Tabi <timur@kernel.org>, Xiubo Li <Xiubo.Lee@gmail.com>,
	shawnguo@kernel.org, Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@nxp.com>,
	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.com>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@gmail.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	linux-imx@nxp.com, kernel@pengutronix.de,
	Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>,
	s.hauer@pengutronix.de, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-media@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl: imx-pcm-dma: Don't request dma channel in probe
Date: Wed, 20 May 2020 19:22:19 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAA+D8APAMRwtVneqFsuBgAhozmQo3R0AQi0bVdUCQO4Af4xVfw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53258cd99caaf1199036737f8fad6cc097939567.camel@pengutronix.de>

Hi

On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 5:42 PM Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de> wrote:
>
> Am Mittwoch, den 20.05.2020, 16:20 +0800 schrieb Shengjiu Wang:
> > Hi
> >
> > On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 6:04 PM Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de> wrote:
> > > Am Dienstag, den 19.05.2020, 17:41 +0800 schrieb Shengjiu Wang:
> > > > There are two requirements that we need to move the request
> > > > of dma channel from probe to open.
> > >
> > > How do you handle -EPROBE_DEFER return code from the channel request if
> > > you don't do it in probe?
> >
> > I use the dma_request_slave_channel or dma_request_channel instead
> > of dmaengine_pcm_request_chan_of. so there should be not -EPROBE_DEFER
> > return code.
>
> This is a pretty weak argument. The dmaengine device might probe after
> you try to get the channel. Using a function to request the channel
> that doesn't allow you to handle probe deferral is IMHO a bug and
> should be fixed, instead of building even more assumptions on top of
> it.
>

I see some driver also request dma channel in open() or hw_params().
how can they avoid the defer probe issue?
for example:
sound/arm/pxa2xx-pcm-lib.c
sound/soc/sprd/sprd-pcm-dma.c

> > > > - When dma device binds with power-domains, the power will
> > > > be enabled when we request dma channel. If the request of dma
> > > > channel happen on probe, then the power-domains will be always
> > > > enabled after kernel boot up,  which is not good for power
> > > > saving,  so we need to move the request of dma channel to .open();
> > >
> > > This is certainly something which could be fixed in the dmaengine
> > > driver.
> >
> > Dma driver always call the pm_runtime_get_sync in
> > device_alloc_chan_resources, the device_alloc_chan_resources is
> > called when channel is requested. so power is enabled on channel
> > request.
>
> So why can't you fix the dmaengine driver to do that RPM call at a
> later time when the channel is actually going to be used? This will
> allow further power savings with other slave devices than the audio
> PCM.
>
> Regards,
> Lucas
>

It seems the best place for calling pm_runtime_get_sync is the
device_alloc_chan_resources, and calling pm_runtime_put_sync
in the .device_free_chan_resources

For the slave_sg mode, the .device_prep_slave_sg and
.device_issue_pending  will be called many times after
.device_alloc_chan_resources. so it is not good to call
pm_runtime_get_sync in .device_prep_slave_sg or
.device_issue_pending

best regards
wang shengjiu

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@gmail.com>
To: Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>
Cc: sumit.semwal@linaro.org, linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org,
	Linux-ALSA <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Timur Tabi <timur@kernel.org>, Xiubo Li <Xiubo.Lee@gmail.com>,
	shawnguo@kernel.org, Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@nxp.com>,
	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.com>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, perex@perex.cz,
	Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@gmail.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	linux-imx@nxp.com, kernel@pengutronix.de,
	Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>,
	s.hauer@pengutronix.de, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-media@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl: imx-pcm-dma: Don't request dma channel in probe
Date: Wed, 20 May 2020 19:22:19 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAA+D8APAMRwtVneqFsuBgAhozmQo3R0AQi0bVdUCQO4Af4xVfw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53258cd99caaf1199036737f8fad6cc097939567.camel@pengutronix.de>

Hi

On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 5:42 PM Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de> wrote:
>
> Am Mittwoch, den 20.05.2020, 16:20 +0800 schrieb Shengjiu Wang:
> > Hi
> >
> > On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 6:04 PM Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de> wrote:
> > > Am Dienstag, den 19.05.2020, 17:41 +0800 schrieb Shengjiu Wang:
> > > > There are two requirements that we need to move the request
> > > > of dma channel from probe to open.
> > >
> > > How do you handle -EPROBE_DEFER return code from the channel request if
> > > you don't do it in probe?
> >
> > I use the dma_request_slave_channel or dma_request_channel instead
> > of dmaengine_pcm_request_chan_of. so there should be not -EPROBE_DEFER
> > return code.
>
> This is a pretty weak argument. The dmaengine device might probe after
> you try to get the channel. Using a function to request the channel
> that doesn't allow you to handle probe deferral is IMHO a bug and
> should be fixed, instead of building even more assumptions on top of
> it.
>

I see some driver also request dma channel in open() or hw_params().
how can they avoid the defer probe issue?
for example:
sound/arm/pxa2xx-pcm-lib.c
sound/soc/sprd/sprd-pcm-dma.c

> > > > - When dma device binds with power-domains, the power will
> > > > be enabled when we request dma channel. If the request of dma
> > > > channel happen on probe, then the power-domains will be always
> > > > enabled after kernel boot up,  which is not good for power
> > > > saving,  so we need to move the request of dma channel to .open();
> > >
> > > This is certainly something which could be fixed in the dmaengine
> > > driver.
> >
> > Dma driver always call the pm_runtime_get_sync in
> > device_alloc_chan_resources, the device_alloc_chan_resources is
> > called when channel is requested. so power is enabled on channel
> > request.
>
> So why can't you fix the dmaengine driver to do that RPM call at a
> later time when the channel is actually going to be used? This will
> allow further power savings with other slave devices than the audio
> PCM.
>
> Regards,
> Lucas
>

It seems the best place for calling pm_runtime_get_sync is the
device_alloc_chan_resources, and calling pm_runtime_put_sync
in the .device_free_chan_resources

For the slave_sg mode, the .device_prep_slave_sg and
.device_issue_pending  will be called many times after
.device_alloc_chan_resources. so it is not good to call
pm_runtime_get_sync in .device_prep_slave_sg or
.device_issue_pending

best regards
wang shengjiu

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@gmail.com>
To: Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>
Cc: sumit.semwal@linaro.org, linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org,
	Linux-ALSA <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Timur Tabi <timur@kernel.org>, Xiubo Li <Xiubo.Lee@gmail.com>,
	shawnguo@kernel.org, Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@nxp.com>,
	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.com>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, perex@perex.cz,
	Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@gmail.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	linux-imx@nxp.com, kernel@pengutronix.de,
	Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>,
	s.hauer@pengutronix.de, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-media@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl: imx-pcm-dma: Don't request dma channel in probe
Date: Wed, 20 May 2020 19:22:19 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAA+D8APAMRwtVneqFsuBgAhozmQo3R0AQi0bVdUCQO4Af4xVfw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53258cd99caaf1199036737f8fad6cc097939567.camel@pengutronix.de>

Hi

On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 5:42 PM Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de> wrote:
>
> Am Mittwoch, den 20.05.2020, 16:20 +0800 schrieb Shengjiu Wang:
> > Hi
> >
> > On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 6:04 PM Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de> wrote:
> > > Am Dienstag, den 19.05.2020, 17:41 +0800 schrieb Shengjiu Wang:
> > > > There are two requirements that we need to move the request
> > > > of dma channel from probe to open.
> > >
> > > How do you handle -EPROBE_DEFER return code from the channel request if
> > > you don't do it in probe?
> >
> > I use the dma_request_slave_channel or dma_request_channel instead
> > of dmaengine_pcm_request_chan_of. so there should be not -EPROBE_DEFER
> > return code.
>
> This is a pretty weak argument. The dmaengine device might probe after
> you try to get the channel. Using a function to request the channel
> that doesn't allow you to handle probe deferral is IMHO a bug and
> should be fixed, instead of building even more assumptions on top of
> it.
>

I see some driver also request dma channel in open() or hw_params().
how can they avoid the defer probe issue?
for example:
sound/arm/pxa2xx-pcm-lib.c
sound/soc/sprd/sprd-pcm-dma.c

> > > > - When dma device binds with power-domains, the power will
> > > > be enabled when we request dma channel. If the request of dma
> > > > channel happen on probe, then the power-domains will be always
> > > > enabled after kernel boot up,  which is not good for power
> > > > saving,  so we need to move the request of dma channel to .open();
> > >
> > > This is certainly something which could be fixed in the dmaengine
> > > driver.
> >
> > Dma driver always call the pm_runtime_get_sync in
> > device_alloc_chan_resources, the device_alloc_chan_resources is
> > called when channel is requested. so power is enabled on channel
> > request.
>
> So why can't you fix the dmaengine driver to do that RPM call at a
> later time when the channel is actually going to be used? This will
> allow further power savings with other slave devices than the audio
> PCM.
>
> Regards,
> Lucas
>

It seems the best place for calling pm_runtime_get_sync is the
device_alloc_chan_resources, and calling pm_runtime_put_sync
in the .device_free_chan_resources

For the slave_sg mode, the .device_prep_slave_sg and
.device_issue_pending  will be called many times after
.device_alloc_chan_resources. so it is not good to call
pm_runtime_get_sync in .device_prep_slave_sg or
.device_issue_pending

best regards
wang shengjiu

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@gmail.com>
To: Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>
Cc: linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org,
	Linux-ALSA <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Timur Tabi <timur@kernel.org>, Xiubo Li <Xiubo.Lee@gmail.com>,
	shawnguo@kernel.org, Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@nxp.com>,
	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.com>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, perex@perex.cz,
	Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@gmail.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	linux-imx@nxp.com, kernel@pengutronix.de, s.hauer@pengutronix.de,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-media@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl: imx-pcm-dma: Don't request dma channel in probe
Date: Wed, 20 May 2020 19:22:19 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAA+D8APAMRwtVneqFsuBgAhozmQo3R0AQi0bVdUCQO4Af4xVfw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53258cd99caaf1199036737f8fad6cc097939567.camel@pengutronix.de>

Hi

On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 5:42 PM Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de> wrote:
>
> Am Mittwoch, den 20.05.2020, 16:20 +0800 schrieb Shengjiu Wang:
> > Hi
> >
> > On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 6:04 PM Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de> wrote:
> > > Am Dienstag, den 19.05.2020, 17:41 +0800 schrieb Shengjiu Wang:
> > > > There are two requirements that we need to move the request
> > > > of dma channel from probe to open.
> > >
> > > How do you handle -EPROBE_DEFER return code from the channel request if
> > > you don't do it in probe?
> >
> > I use the dma_request_slave_channel or dma_request_channel instead
> > of dmaengine_pcm_request_chan_of. so there should be not -EPROBE_DEFER
> > return code.
>
> This is a pretty weak argument. The dmaengine device might probe after
> you try to get the channel. Using a function to request the channel
> that doesn't allow you to handle probe deferral is IMHO a bug and
> should be fixed, instead of building even more assumptions on top of
> it.
>

I see some driver also request dma channel in open() or hw_params().
how can they avoid the defer probe issue?
for example:
sound/arm/pxa2xx-pcm-lib.c
sound/soc/sprd/sprd-pcm-dma.c

> > > > - When dma device binds with power-domains, the power will
> > > > be enabled when we request dma channel. If the request of dma
> > > > channel happen on probe, then the power-domains will be always
> > > > enabled after kernel boot up,  which is not good for power
> > > > saving,  so we need to move the request of dma channel to .open();
> > >
> > > This is certainly something which could be fixed in the dmaengine
> > > driver.
> >
> > Dma driver always call the pm_runtime_get_sync in
> > device_alloc_chan_resources, the device_alloc_chan_resources is
> > called when channel is requested. so power is enabled on channel
> > request.
>
> So why can't you fix the dmaengine driver to do that RPM call at a
> later time when the channel is actually going to be used? This will
> allow further power savings with other slave devices than the audio
> PCM.
>
> Regards,
> Lucas
>

It seems the best place for calling pm_runtime_get_sync is the
device_alloc_chan_resources, and calling pm_runtime_put_sync
in the .device_free_chan_resources

For the slave_sg mode, the .device_prep_slave_sg and
.device_issue_pending  will be called many times after
.device_alloc_chan_resources. so it is not good to call
pm_runtime_get_sync in .device_prep_slave_sg or
.device_issue_pending

best regards
wang shengjiu
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

  reply	other threads:[~2020-05-20 11:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 87+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-05-19  9:41 [PATCH] ASoC: fsl: imx-pcm-dma: Don't request dma channel in probe Shengjiu Wang
2020-05-19  9:41 ` Shengjiu Wang
2020-05-19  9:41 ` Shengjiu Wang
2020-05-19 10:01 ` Lucas Stach
2020-05-19 10:01   ` Lucas Stach
2020-05-19 10:01   ` Lucas Stach
2020-05-19 10:01   ` Lucas Stach
2020-05-20  8:20   ` Shengjiu Wang
2020-05-20  8:20     ` Shengjiu Wang
2020-05-20  8:20     ` Shengjiu Wang
2020-05-20  8:20     ` Shengjiu Wang
2020-05-20  8:20     ` Shengjiu Wang
2020-05-20  9:42     ` Lucas Stach
2020-05-20  9:42       ` Lucas Stach
2020-05-20  9:42       ` Lucas Stach
2020-05-20  9:42       ` Lucas Stach
2020-05-20  9:42       ` Lucas Stach
2020-05-20 11:22       ` Shengjiu Wang [this message]
2020-05-20 11:22         ` Shengjiu Wang
2020-05-20 11:22         ` Shengjiu Wang
2020-05-20 11:22         ` Shengjiu Wang
2020-05-20 11:22         ` Shengjiu Wang
2020-05-20 12:38         ` Mark Brown
2020-05-20 12:38           ` Mark Brown
2020-05-20 12:38           ` Mark Brown
2020-05-20 12:38           ` Mark Brown
2020-05-20 12:38           ` Mark Brown
2020-05-21 11:30           ` Shengjiu Wang
2020-05-21 11:30             ` Shengjiu Wang
2020-05-21 11:30             ` Shengjiu Wang
2020-05-21 11:30             ` Shengjiu Wang
2020-05-21 11:30             ` Shengjiu Wang
2020-05-22 13:12             ` Mark Brown
2020-05-22 13:12               ` Mark Brown
2020-05-22 13:12               ` Mark Brown
2020-05-22 13:12               ` Mark Brown
2020-05-22 13:12               ` Mark Brown
2021-04-14 14:33       ` Robin Gong
2021-04-14 14:33         ` Robin Gong
2021-04-14 14:33         ` Robin Gong
2021-04-14 14:33         ` Robin Gong
2021-04-14 14:33         ` Robin Gong
2021-04-14 15:33         ` Lucas Stach
2021-04-14 15:33           ` Lucas Stach
2021-04-14 15:33           ` Lucas Stach
2021-04-14 15:33           ` Lucas Stach
2021-04-14 15:33           ` Lucas Stach
2021-04-19  7:17           ` Robin Gong
2021-04-19  7:17             ` Robin Gong
2021-04-19  7:17             ` Robin Gong
2021-04-19  7:17             ` Robin Gong
2021-04-19  7:17             ` Robin Gong
2021-04-19  9:46             ` Lucas Stach
2021-04-19  9:46               ` Lucas Stach
2021-04-19  9:46               ` Lucas Stach
2021-04-19  9:46               ` Lucas Stach
2021-04-19  9:46               ` Lucas Stach
2021-04-20 13:47               ` Robin Gong
2021-04-20 13:47                 ` Robin Gong
2021-04-20 13:47                 ` Robin Gong
2021-04-20 13:47                 ` Robin Gong
2021-04-20 13:47                 ` Robin Gong
2021-04-20 14:00                 ` Lucas Stach
2021-04-20 14:00                   ` Lucas Stach
2021-04-20 14:00                   ` Lucas Stach
2021-04-20 14:00                   ` Lucas Stach
2021-04-20 14:00                   ` Lucas Stach
2021-04-21 14:54                   ` Robin Gong
2021-04-21 14:54                     ` Robin Gong
2021-04-21 14:54                     ` Robin Gong
2021-04-21 14:54                     ` Robin Gong
2021-04-21 14:54                     ` Robin Gong
2021-04-21 17:43                     ` Lucas Stach
2021-04-21 17:43                       ` Lucas Stach
2021-04-21 17:43                       ` Lucas Stach
2021-04-21 17:43                       ` Lucas Stach
2021-04-21 17:43                       ` Lucas Stach
2021-04-21 17:46                       ` Mark Brown
2021-04-21 17:46                         ` Mark Brown
2021-04-21 17:46                         ` Mark Brown
2021-04-21 17:46                         ` Mark Brown
2021-04-21 17:46                         ` Mark Brown
2021-04-22  3:33                       ` Robin Gong
2021-04-22  3:33                         ` Robin Gong
2021-04-22  3:33                         ` Robin Gong
2021-04-22  3:33                         ` Robin Gong
2021-04-22  3:33                         ` Robin Gong

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=CAA+D8APAMRwtVneqFsuBgAhozmQo3R0AQi0bVdUCQO4Af4xVfw@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=shengjiu.wang@gmail.com \
    --cc=Xiubo.Lee@gmail.com \
    --cc=alsa-devel@alsa-project.org \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=festevam@gmail.com \
    --cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=l.stach@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
    --cc=linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-imx@nxp.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=nicoleotsuka@gmail.com \
    --cc=perex@perex.cz \
    --cc=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=shawnguo@kernel.org \
    --cc=shengjiu.wang@nxp.com \
    --cc=sumit.semwal@linaro.org \
    --cc=timur@kernel.org \
    --cc=tiwai@suse.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.