[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4FE889D6.4030500@wwwdotorg.org>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 09:55:02 -0600
From: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
To: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>
CC: "khali@...ux-fr.org" <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
"w.sang@...gutronix.de" <w.sang@...gutronix.de>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>,
"linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Prashant Gaikwad <pgaikwad@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: tegra: use clk_disable_unprepare in place of clk_disable
On 06/25/2012 03:46 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
> Stephen,
>
> On Wednesday 20 June 2012 09:57 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 06/20/2012 10:26 AM, Stephen Warren wrote:
>>> On 06/20/2012 06:56 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>>>> Use clk_disable_unprepare() inplace of clk_disable().
>>>> This was missed as part of moving clock enable/disable to
>>>> prepare/unprepare for using the common clock framework.
>> ...
>>> I see no reason not to take the second patch in the series through the
>>> I2C tree though.
>> Uggh. Ignore that paragraph - the other patch was sent separately not as
>> a series.
>
> so are you taking care of this patch or do I need to send the patch
> based on your tree in place of linux-next?
Yes, this patch should be applied through the Tegra tree, since it will
be a dependency of the common clock framework switchover there, which I
hope to take place this kernel cycle.
I did just attempt to apply this patch to the for-3.6/common-clk branch,
but it doesn't apply:-( Could you please rebase and resend. Thanks.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists