Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 19:53:59 +0200
From: Samuel Ortiz <sameo@linux.intel.com>
To: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
Cc: Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>, Keshava Munegowda <keshava_mgowda@ti.com>,
        linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gadiyar@ti.com, parthab@india.ti.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mfd: omap: fix the crash during omap ehci or ohci driver
 initialization
Message-ID: <20110621175359.GA22420@sortiz-mobl>
References: <1307367739-20110-1-git-send-email-keshava_mgowda@ti.com>
 <20110620132626.GJ22420@sortiz-mobl>
 <20110620132851.GJ14262@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com>
 <20110620145941.GQ22420@sortiz-mobl>
 <87liww6tva.fsf@ti.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87liww6tva.fsf@ti.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1761
Lines: 51

Hi Kevin,

On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 03:06:01PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Samuel Ortiz <sameo@linux.intel.com> writes:
> 
> > Hi Felipe,
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 04:28:52PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> 
> >> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 03:26:26PM +0200, Samuel Ortiz wrote:
> >> > On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 07:12:19PM +0530, Keshava Munegowda wrote:
> >> > > From: Keshava Munegowda <Keshava_mgowda@ti.com>
> >> > > 
> >> > > Oops are produced during initialization of ehci and ohci
> >> > > drivers. This is because the run time pm apis are used by
> >> > > the driver but the corresponding hwmod structures and
> >> > > initialization is not merged. 
> >> > You mean they're currently checked in a different tree ? Is that a
> >> > public one?
> >> 
> >> it was supposed to go via linux-omap tree but the patches got lost in
> >> the limbo :-(
> > Then shouldn't those patches be the ones to be sent to Linus as a fix for 3.0 ?
> 
> If they were ready, maybe.  But those patches still need important work
> (and review) and are not "fix" material but need to wait until the next
> merge window.
Fair enough.

 
> Basically, the original patch should not have been submitted to mainline
> until the runtime PM support was ready, so the correct short term fix is
> to simply revert.
>
> Also, to echo the question from Dima Zavin:
> 
> Why isn't this just a simple revert of the original patch?
I did a revert in my tree.

Cheers,
Samuel.

-- 
Intel Open Source Technology Centre
http://oss.intel.com/
--
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/