linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 1/3] Documentation: common clk API

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 21 Mar 2012 08:59:11 +0000
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Paul Walmsley <paul@...an.com>
Cc:	"Turquette, Mike" <mturquette@...com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@...aro.org>,
	Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
	linaro-dev@...ts.linaro.org,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Saravana Kannan <skannan@...eaurora.org>,
	Jeremy Kerr <jeremy.kerr@...onical.com>,
	Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
	Deepak Saxena <dsaxena@...aro.org>, patches@...aro.org,
	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Richard Zhao <richard.zhao@...aro.org>,
	Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...escale.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
	linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/3] Documentation: common clk API

On Tuesday 20 March 2012, Paul Walmsley wrote:
> Hello Arnd,
> 
> On Sat, 17 Mar 2012, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> 
> > I think it's rather pointless, because the option is not going to
> > be user selectable but will get selected by the platform unless I'm
> > mistaken. The platform maintainers that care already know the state
> > of the framework.
> 
> This is where we have differing views, I think.  Clearly, Sascha, 
> Saravana, Rob, and I have at least slightly different opinions on the 
> durability of the existing API and code.  So it seems reasonable to assume 
> that others who have not followed the development of the common clock code 
> might mistake the implementation or API as being stable and well-defined.
> 
> It sounds like the primary objection is to the use of CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL.  
> So here is a patch to simply note the status of this code in its Kconfig 
> text.

Yes, looks good to me. If there are no objections, I'll apply this one.

Thanks,

	Arnd

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/