Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756125Ab1CGUBR (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Mar 2011 15:01:17 -0500 Received: from va3ehsobe005.messaging.microsoft.com ([216.32.180.31]:48040 "EHLO VA3EHSOBE005.bigfish.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756098Ab1CGUBP convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Mar 2011 15:01:15 -0500 X-SpamScore: -30 X-BigFish: VS-30(zz542N1432N98dN4015L9371Pzz1202hzz8275bh8275dhz2dh2a8h668h61h) X-Spam-TCS-SCL: 0:0 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: KIP:(null);UIP:(null);IPVD:NLI;H:mail.freescale.net;RD:none;EFVD:NLI From: Nguyen Dinh-R00091 To: "s.hauer@pengutronix.de" CC: Arnaud Patard , "linux@arm.linux.org.uk" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Vaidyanathan Ranjani-RA5478 , "u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de" , Zhang Lily-R58066 , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Subject: RE: [PATCHv2 1/2] ARM: mx51: Implement code to allow mx51 to enter WFI Thread-Topic: [PATCHv2 1/2] ARM: mx51: Implement code to allow mx51 to enter WFI Thread-Index: AQHL3OEO2wru9FbG9kebNQISz1Arp5QiEUJggAB+eQD//7d2MA== Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 20:01:11 +0000 Message-ID: <56132A77AB93C141BF06E6B96CA6CFEA194690@039-SN1MPN1-004.039d.mgd.msft.net> References: <1299281399-32304-1-git-send-email-Dinh.Nguyen@freescale.com> <56132A77AB93C141BF06E6B96CA6CFEA19124C@039-SN1MPN1-004.039d.mgd.msft.net> <87oc5puwg3.fsf@lebrac.rtp-net.org> <56132A77AB93C141BF06E6B96CA6CFEA193F14@039-SN1MPN1-004.039d.mgd.msft.net> <87fwqyvrzf.fsf@lebrac.rtp-net.org> <56132A77AB93C141BF06E6B96CA6CFEA1940F8@039-SN1MPN1-004.039d.mgd.msft.net> <20110307180700.GQ29521@pengutronix.de> In-Reply-To: <20110307180700.GQ29521@pengutronix.de> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.81.68.39] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: freescale.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3457 Lines: 78 Hi Sascha, >-----Original Message----- >From: s.hauer@pengutronix.de [mailto:s.hauer@pengutronix.de] >Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 12:07 PM >To: Nguyen Dinh-R00091 >Cc: Arnaud Patard; linux@arm.linux.org.uk; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Vaidyanathan Ranjani-RA5478; >u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de; Zhang Lily-R58066; linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org >Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/2] ARM: mx51: Implement code to allow mx51 to enter WFI > >On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 04:35:48PM +0000, Nguyen Dinh-R00091 wrote: >> Hi Arnaud, >> >> >> >-----Original Message----- >> >From: linux-arm-kernel-bounces@lists.infradead.org [mailto:linux-arm-kernel- >> >bounces@lists.infradead.org] On Behalf Of Arnaud Patard >> >Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 10:02 AM >> >To: Nguyen Dinh-R00091 >> >Cc: linux@arm.linux.org.uk; s.hauer@pengutronix.de; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Vaidyanathan >> >Ranjani-RA5478; u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de; Zhang Lily-R58066; linux-arm- >> >kernel@lists.infradead.org >> >Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/2] ARM: mx51: Implement code to allow mx51 to enter WFI >> > >> >Nguyen Dinh-R00091 writes: >> > >> >> Hi Arnaud, >> > >> >Hi, >> >> >> >> Just to verify that you are testing on an MX51-Babbage board? Here's my log: >> > >> >I never said I was testing on babbage. The reason is because I'm using a >> >efika smartbook and not a babbage. >> > >> >> >> >> root@freescale ~$ uname -a >> >> Linux freescale 2.6.38-rc1+ #93 Fri Mar 4 17:18:15 CST 2011 armv7l GNU/Linux >> > >> >2.6.38-rc1+ ? which tree are you using ? The for-next branch of Sascha >> >Hauer's tree is at least 2.6.38-rc5 so you're trying to merge something >> >without even testing it on the current tree. Can you please test suspend >> >with current imx for-next tree (with no other patches than theses 2 >> >patches if possible), in order to make sure that it's still working with it ? >> > >> >> The current imx for-next tree is not booting on my Babbage board. Is >> it okay for you with your HW. I'll have to debug the booting part >> first. > >Probably because other than kconfig states i.MX51 and i.MX53 cannot be >compiled in one kernel. the for-next branch boots fine on my babbage. > This doesn't seem right. When I do a "make mx51_defconfig", I see that mx51 and mx53 are selected, which is odd but should be okay if you move mx51_defconfig->mx5_defconfig. After doing a "make mx51_defconfig", I have go unselect mx53 in the menuconfig and the image can boot for me on my MX51 HW. I didn't have to do in 2.6.38-rc1? Shouldn't the image generated from mx51_defconfig be bootable on both mx51 and mx53? I thought we were going the down the path of a single kernel for mx50, mx51, and mx53? Am I missing the correct steps for a single kernel all the mx5 series SoCs? Internally, we have a single mx5_defconfig for all MX5 SOCs. Is that something we should look to do? Thanks, Dinh >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 | -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/