Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 07 May 2015 11:18:50 -0700 | From | Stephen Boyd <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] clk: improve handling of orphan clocks |
| |
On 05/07/15 01:22, Tero Kristo wrote: > On 05/02/2015 02:40 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote: >> On 05/01/15 15:07, Heiko Stübner wrote: >>> Am Freitag, 1. Mai 2015, 13:52:47 schrieb Stephen Boyd: >>> >>>>> Instead I guess we could hook it less deep into clk_get_sys, like >>>>> in the >>>>> following patch? >>>> It looks like it will work at least, but still I'd prefer to keep the >>>> orphan check contained to clk.c. How about this compile tested only >>>> patch? >>> I gave this a spin on my rk3288-firefly board. It still boots, the >>> clock tree >>> looks the same and it also still defers nicely in the scenario I >>> needed it >>> for. The implementation also looks nice - and of course much more >>> compact than >>> my check in two places :-) . I don't know if you want to put this as >>> follow-up >>> on top or fold it into the original orphan-check, so in any case >>> >>> Tested-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de> >>> Reviewed-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de> >> >> Thanks. I'm leaning towards tossing your patch 2/2 and replacing it with >> my patch and a note that it's based on an earlier patch from you. > > FWIW, just gave a try for these two patches on all TI boards I have > access to. > > Tested-by: Tero Kristo <t-kristo@ti.com> > > I didn't try your evolved patch though, as you don't seem to have made > your mind yet. >
Thanks. Can you try the evolved patch? It's in linux-next now as commit 882667c1fcf1, and it seems to at least break sunxi boot. I'd be interested if it broke TI boards.
-- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
| |