[PATCHv2 1/2] ARM: mx51: Implement code to allow mx51 to enter WFI
R00091 at freescale.com
Mon Mar 7 15:01:11 EST 2011
>From: s.hauer at pengutronix.de [mailto:s.hauer at pengutronix.de]
>Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 12:07 PM
>To: Nguyen Dinh-R00091
>Cc: Arnaud Patard; linux at arm.linux.org.uk; linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org; Vaidyanathan Ranjani-RA5478;
>u.kleine-koenig at pengutronix.de; Zhang Lily-R58066; linux-arm-kernel at 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 at lists.infradead.org [mailto:linux-arm-kernel-
>> >bounces at lists.infradead.org] On Behalf Of Arnaud Patard
>> >Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 10:02 AM
>> >To: Nguyen Dinh-R00091
>> >Cc: linux at arm.linux.org.uk; s.hauer at pengutronix.de; linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org; Vaidyanathan
>> >Ranjani-RA5478; u.kleine-koenig at pengutronix.de; Zhang Lily-R58066; linux-arm-
>> >kernel at lists.infradead.org
>> >Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/2] ARM: mx51: Implement code to allow mx51 to enter WFI
>> >Nguyen Dinh-R00091 <R00091 at freescale.com> writes:
>> >> Hi Arnaud,
>> >> 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 at 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
>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?
>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 |
More information about the linux-arm-kernel