[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130129095158.GS4118@tbergstrom-lnx.Nvidia.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 11:51:58 +0200
From: Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@...dia.com>
To: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
CC: Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>,
Prashant Gaikwad <pgaikwad@...dia.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] clk: tegra: adapt tegra periph clk to mux
table/mask
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 05:49:53PM +0100, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 01/28/2013 08:54 AM, Peter De Schrijver wrote:
> > The tegra peripheral clock type uses struct clk_mux directly, so it needs to
> > be updated to handle the new mask and table fields. Also the macros need
> > to be updated
>
> Just a quick note on patch dependencies here:
>
> Patch 1/2 can presumably be taken through the clk tree whenever Mike is
> OK with it.
>
> Patch 2/2 depends on patches in the Tegra tree for 3.9. Since patch 2/2
> is useful mostly for the Tegra114 clock driver, and I don't imagine that
> will get posted/merged in time for 3.9, it's probably easiest to just
> take patch 2/2 for 3.10 along with the Tegra114 clock driver. Also, I
> imagine there won't be any more clk/Tegra tree dependencies in 3.10, so
> patch 2/2 and the Tegra114 clk driver patches can likely go through the
> clk tree itself for 3.10.
No. Because 1/2 changes struct clk_mux and the tegra peripheral clock type
uses struct clk_mux directly, 2/2 needs to be applied together with 1/2, even
if the new functionality is not yet used.
Cheers,
Peter.
--
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