Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 12 Apr 2012 21:11:59 +0800 | From | Shawn Guo <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 00/13] common clk framework misc fixes |
| |
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 11:14:38AM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thursday 12 April 2012, Mike Turquette wrote: > > This series collects many of the fixes posted for the recently merged > > common clock framework as well as some general clean-up. Most of the > > code classifies as a clean-up moreso than a bug fix; hopefully this is > > not a problem since the common clk framework is new code pulled for 3.4. > > > > Patches are based on v3.4-rc2 and can be pulled from: > > git://git.linaro.org/people/mturquette/linux.git v3.4-rc2-clk-fixes > > > > Please let me know I missed any critical fixes that were posted to the > > list already. > > > > Arnd & Olof, if there are no objections to these changes can this get > > pulled through the arm-soc tree? > > I think pulling it in through the arm-soc tree is still ok, but it's > borderline because of the size and patch 13 is probably too big, > in addition to the comments that were made there. > > Let's pull patches 1 through 12 in to a separate series that we don't > mix with the other bug fixes. Mike, please send a pull request with the > Acks added in. > I just appended 3 more patches to the series. Patches #1 and #2 change the interface between clk core and clk drivers - clk_ops a little bit, (this is something Mike acked a couple of weeks ago, but missed from the series) and patch #3 is a critical bug fix. So unless we can send the whole series for -rc, I'd vote we send none of them for -rc. Instead, we can stabilize it somewhere and ask all the clk driver porting base on that.
Sending part of the cleanup/fixup and leaving the other that could require changes on clk drivers out is a bad idea to me.
-- Regards, Shawn
| |