[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdbr-Cuz14ZL_AGs4_SgDGQYgbpxQ_NjOakWrpX7gqzssA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 09:20:02 +0200
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Linus WALLEIJ <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>,
Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 21/33] clk: ux500: Add Device Tree support for the PRCC
Kernel clock
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Sep 2013, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> But if you still don't like this, let me cook a counter-patch so
>> I can realized on my own how terribly wrong I am...
>
> I'm going to yank all of the clk_register_clkdev() calls out
> imminently anyway, so all those these hiding bugs will soon become
> apparent in any case. Why don't I place my 'remove ATAGs' patch-set
> on top of this one and then finally remove the clk_register_clkdev()s
> and watch the carnage ensue?
So that creates problem for me as maintainer if I need to
pull or revert some of the patches on top of the stack, all of
a sudden the file looks horrible. That is why I want every step
to be as clean a cut as possible.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
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