linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] i2c: tegra: use clk_disable_unprepare in place of clk

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <4FE9E338.6090601@wwwdotorg.org>
Date:	Tue, 26 Jun 2012 10:28:40 -0600
From:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
To:	Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>,
	"w.sang@...gutronix.de" <w.sang@...gutronix.de>
CC:	"khali@...ux-fr.org" <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
	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 06/26/2012 12:27 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
> On Monday 25 June 2012 09:25 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> 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.
> 
> Looked at your common_clk branch and the related code is not there.
> The clk_disable() in the particular case is introduced by change
> i2c: tegra: make all resource allocation through devm_*
> which is not in your branch.
> 
> Then later Prashant post the change as
> i2c: tegra: Add clk_prepare/clk_unprepare
> and it does not accounted for the above patch.
> 
> So none of your local tree will have this issue.

OK. In that case, it's best if this patch goes through the I2C tree
since that's where the code is that it's modifying. This might not be
optimal for runtime git bisection depending on the order Linus ends up
merging things, but it's probably as good as we can do without
inter-twining the I2C and Tegra trees a lot.
--
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/